Day 7: Ken Paxton Impeachment Trial
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton coordinated through encrypted communications with a lawyer he hired to investigate law enforcement officials probing one of the Republican’s wealthy donors, the lawyer testified at Paxton’s impeachment trial Tuesday.
The testimony from Brandon Cammack on the sixth day of the historic proceeding addressed a central charge against Paxton: that he abused his office to help a local real estate developer resist FBI investigation by hiring an outside attorney to look into the agents, a judge and other officials involved in the probe.
Cammack told the jury of state senators who could decide Paxton’s political fate within days that he consulted with the attorney general about how to proceed. Cammack also said he kept Paxton apprised as he obtained a series of grand jury subpoenas with guidance from the developer’s lawyer.
“I did everything at his supervision,” Cammack said of Paxton.
Paxton has pleaded not guilty in the impeachment. He is not required to be present for testimony and was absent Tuesday, as he has been for most of the trial.
Paxton’s hiring of Cammack in 2020 prompted eight of his top deputies to report the attorney general to law enforcement for allegedly committing crimes to help developer Nate Paul. Their allegations prompted an ongoing FBI investigation of Paxton.
That year, Paul alleged wrongdoing by state and federal authorities after the FBI searched his home. Several of Paxton’s former deputies have testified that they found Paul’s claims “ludicrous” and not worthy of investigation.
Paul was indicted in June on charges of making false statements to banks. He pleaded not guilty.
—
Day 6: Ken Paxton Impeachment Trial
Day 6: Ken Paxton Impeachment Trial
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — How much does an extramarital affair matter to whether Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton keeps his job? An answer may arrive soon.
The question hangs over the Republican’s impeachment trial that resumes Tuesday and is approaching the final stretch of testimony before a jury of state senators decides whether Paxton should be removed from office on charges of corruption and bribery. Most of the senators are Republicans and one is his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, although she will not have a vote in the verdict.
But she has attended the entire trial so far, including Monday, when she sat in the Senate chamber as one of her husband’s former employees gave an account of the affair in the most public detail to date: How the relationship took a toll on staffers, how she urged Paxton to consider the risks and how she asked him to tell his wife about the woman.
“Just because somebody has an affair doesn’t mean they’re a — quote — ‘criminal’ does it?” Tony Buzbee, Paxton’s attorney, asked when it was the defense’s turn to respond.
“I would not associate that directly,” said Katherine Cary, a former chief of staff in Paxton’s office, who is now one of six ex-employees to testify against their former boss since the trial began last week.
The exchange capped one of the most distinctive moments of witness testimony so far after five days of former Paxton aides giving various — but at times overlapping — accounts of how one of Texas’ most powerful figures allegedly abused his power to help a local real estate developer named Nate Paul, who was under FBI investigation at the time. Paul was indicted this summer on charges of making false statements to banks. He has pleaded not guilty.
Paul, who once gave Paxton a $25,000 campaign contribution, also employed the woman with whom Paxton had the affair.
Day 5: Ken Paxton Impeachment Trial
AUSTIN, Texas – A second week of testimony began today in the impeachment trial of suspended Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
When the trial recessed Friday afternoon,David Maxwell, the former law enforcement director under Paxton in the attorney general’s office had testified that that he cautioned Paxton against getting involved with Nate Paul, the Austin real estate developer at the center of the impeachment case. Paul had voiced his displeasure to Paxton with what he called federal authorities illegally searched his home the year before.
Maxwell, a former Texas Ranger testified that he found Paul’s complaint meritless and that he had shared that opinion with Paxton. Rather than heed his advice and close the matter, Maxwell said, Paxton hired an outside lawyer to investigate Paul’s complaint.
Maxwell testified that he warned Paxton< “If he didn’t get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted.”
—
Day 4: Texas AG Ken Paxton’s impeachment trial
UPDATED 9/8/23 6:26 a.m.
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has long denied corruption accusations that have dogged him for years. But as his impeachment trial gets underway, another defense is emerging: that fellow Republicans plotted to oust him.
His attorneys have so far presented no evidence in the trial, which continued on Day 3 Thursday, that Paxton was the victim of an attempt to replace him. But as former aides give testimony about how Paxton pressured them to help a political donor who was under FBI investigation, Paxton’s attorneys have raised questions about lobbyists and a meeting at Gov. Greg Abbott’s office, and have brought up George P. Bush, who lost to Paxton in last year’s Republican primary.
“It was not a mutiny,” Ryan Bangert, one of Paxton’s former aides, testified Thursday about a group of deputies who reported their boss to the FBI in 2020. “We were protecting the interest of the state and protecting the interest of the attorney general and, in my view, signing our professional death warrant at the same time.”
The start of the trial is putting into view how lawyers for Paxton, who has been shadowed by criminal charges and an ongoing FBI investigating for years, intend to defend one of Texas’ most powerful figures. Paxton has pleaded not guilty to the articles of impeachment, which center on accusations of bribery and abuse of office.
The waving at a broad conspiracy is an extension of how Paxton has spent months denouncing his impeachment by the Republican-controlled House in May as a politically driven attack by Democrats and rivals within his own party. It is a message amplified by his supporters on the far right, who for years have cheered on Paxton as he elevated his national profile by trying to help former President Donald Trump baselessly overturn the 2020 election and through lawsuits against President Joe Biden’s administration.
The people Paxton needs to ultimately convince are Republican senators serving as the jury. A two-thirds majority — or 21 senators — is required for conviction, meaning that if all 12 Democrats vote against Paxton, at least nine Republicans would have to join them.
(Associated Press)
—
Day 3: Texas AG Ken Paxton’s impeachment trial
UPDATED 9//7/2023 5:16 a. m.
Texas AG Ken Paxton’s former aide who reported him to FBI is first key witness in impeachment trial
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton again stayed away from his impeachment trial that could result in his removal from office over allegations of corruption. Paxton was not in the Texas Senate on Wednesday as one of his former aides testified that he confronted the Republican about why he appeared to keep going out of his way to help one of his donors. Jeff Mateer is one of the deputies who reported Paxton to the FBI, and he’s the first key witness in a trial that could last weeks. Paxton has pleaded not guilty and has called his impeachment politically motivated.
Unexplained Caribbean and European trips that cost taxpayers more than $90,000. A $600 sports coat paid for by an event organizer. A $45 office Christmas cake taken as his own. Those were among the perks that Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s former employees say he reveled in while using his office in ways that now have him facing a federal criminal investigation and potential ouster over allegations of corruption.
Paxton’s impeachment trial that started Tuesday covers years of highly publicized scandal, criminal charges and whistleblower accounts from his inner circle.
But records obtained by The Associated Press, interviews with former aides and a review of thousands of legal filings reveal other ways in which Paxton allegedly reaped the benefits of being one of Texas’ most powerful figures. Together, they show how conviction and removal from office could cost Paxton not just a job but a lifestyle.
Spokespersons for Paxton and the attorney general’s office did not respond to questions about the accusations made by Paxton’s former staff. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who will act as judge during the impeachment trial, issued a sweeping gag order.
(Associated Press)
Day 2: Texas AG Ken Paxton’s impeachment trial
Updated: 9/6/23 9:42 a.m.
Austin, Texas (WBAP/KLIF) – The has been a delay in the continuation of the impeachment trial for the embattled Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. There has been no word on the reason for the delay. Legal expert Kobby Warren, of Dallas law firm warren-Healy opined on a WFAA-TV panel this morning that perhaps a plea deal may be taking shape. The trial finally resumed at 9:47 a.m.
The historic impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton began Tuesday with accusations of corruption that went unchecked for years and the Republican pleading not guilty as his party confronts whether to oust one of former President Donald Trump’s biggest defenders.
But the day ended without Paxton around at all — he left and did not return after the state Senate overwhelming rejected his numerous attempts to dismiss the charges. His absence does not stop Texas’ first impeachment trial in nearly 50 years but demonstrates the potential twists ahead in the coming weeks.
He was not the only one who left early: Although the start of the trial was carried live by some Texas stations and supporters of Paxton lined up before sunrise outside the Capitol, by the end empty seats in the Senate gallery outnumbered onlookers.
—-
Updated 9/6/23 7:14 a.m.
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — The impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton began with a former aide who reported him to the FBI on the witness stand, and his wife watching from her desk in the state Senate but prohibited from participating.
How much Paxton himself will take part in the historic trial that resumes Wednesday is up in the air. Facing the gravest threat yet to his political future, Paxton left the start of the proceedings early and cannot be compelled to testify over accusations of corruption that have dogged one of Texas’ most powerful figures for years.
The trial could last weeks and is beginning with testimony from Paxton’s former second-in-command, the first in a potentially long line of onetime allies who could help Republican impeachment managers build their case that Paxton should be permanently removed from office.
Paxton pleaded not guilty Tuesday but did not return for opening arguments, when his attorneys sharply criticized the impeachment and urged Republican senators to acquit.
Original post 9/5/23
Day 1: Ken Paxton’s Impeachment Trial
Austin (WBAP/KLIF) – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton faces an impeachment trial in the state Senate starting Tuesday on articles overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives.
Paxton, a Republican and star of the conservatives legal movement, was suspended from office in May when the GOP-controlled House voted 121-23 to impeach him on 20 articles ranging from bribery to abuse of public trust. Most of the articles deal with Paxton using his office to benefit a wealthy donor, Nate Paul, prompting eight of the attorney general’s top deputies to report him to the FBI in 2020.
Three other charges date back to Paxton’s pending 2015 felony securities fraud case, including lying to state investigators. The Senate is not immediately taking up those charges and a fourth related to Paxton’s ethics filings in the impeachment trial.
Paxton has said he expects to be acquitted and that the charges are based on “hearsay and gossip, parroting long-disproven claims.”
ARTICLE 1 – Protection of charitable organization
Paxton is accused of failing to act as a public protector of charitable organizations by directing his employees in the attorney general’s office to intervene in a lawsuit brought by the Roy F. & JoAnn Cole Mitte Foundation against entities controlled by Paul, harming the Austin charity in an effort to benefit the wealthy donor.
ARTICLE 2 – Abuse of the opinion process
Paxton is accused of misusing his official power to issue written legal opinions. He allegedly had employees prepare an opinion that protected some of Paul’s properties from being sold in foreclosure. Paxton concealed his actions by asking a Senate committee chairperson to seek that opinion. He’s also accused of directing employees to reverse their legal conclusion to help Paul.
ARTICLE 3 – Abuse of the open records process
Paxton is accused of misusing his official power by allegedly interfering with his office’s handling of a public records request dealing with the files of a criminal investigation into Paul.
ARTICLE 4 – Misuse of official information
Paxton is accused of misusing his power to administer public information law by improperly obtaining previously undisclosed information held by the attorney general’s office to benefit Paul.
DISREGARD OF OFFICIAL DUTY
ARTICLE 5 – Engagement of Cammack
Paxton is accused of misusing official powers by hiring attorney Brandon Cammack to investigate a baseless complaint made by Paul. That led to Cammack issuing more than 30 grand jury subpoenas in an effort to help Paul.
ARTICLE 6 – Termination of whistleblowers
Paxton is accused of violating the state’s whistleblower law by retaliating against employees who reported his alleged unlawful acts to law enforcement, terminating them without good cause or due process. He’s also accused of engaging in a public and private campaign to impugn those employees’ professional reputations or prejudice their future employment.
MISAPPLICATION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES
ARTICLE 7 – Whistleblower investigation and report
Paxton is accused of misusing public resources by directing employees to conduct a sham investigation into terminated employees’ whistleblower complaints and publish a report containing false or misleading statements in Paxton’s defense.
DISREGARD OF OFFICIAL DUTY
ARTICLE 8 – Settlement Agreement
Paxton is accused of misusing his official powers by concealing his wrongful acts in connection with the whistleblower’s complaints by entering into a settlement with the whistleblowers that provides for payment from public funds. The settlement halted the wrongful termination suit and delayed the discovery of facts and testimony at trial, to Paxton’s advantage. That allegedly prevented voters from making an informed decision about his reelection in 2022.
CONSTITUTIONAL BRIBERY
ARTICLE 9 – Paul’s employment of a woman with whom Paxton has acknowledged having an affair
It is alleged that Paxton benefited from Paul’s decision to hire the woman. In exchange, Paul allegedly received favorable legal assistance from, or specialized access to, the attorney general’s office.
ARTICLE 10 – Paul’s providing renovations to Paxton home
It is alleged that in exchange for providing the renovations, Paul received favorable legal assistance from, or specialized access to, the attorney general’s office.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
ARTICLE 11 – Abuse of judicial process
Paxton is accused of abusing the process to thwart justice in the securities fraud case against him. It is alleged that Paxton concealed facts from voters with protracted delay of that trial, preventing voters from making an informed decision about his election. The Senate is not, at least initially, taking up this article in Paxton’s impeachment trial.
ARTICLE 12 – Abuse of judicial process
It is alleged that Paxton benefited from donor Jeff Blackard’s lawsuit that interfered with payment of the prosecutors in Paxton’s securities fraud case. That allegedly delayed the case, including discovery of facts and testimony at trial, and deprived voters of a chance to make an informed decision when voting for attorney general.
The Senate is not, at least initially, taking up this article in Paxton’s impeachment trial.
FALSE STATEMENTS IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
ARTICLE 13 – State Securities Board investigation
Paxton is accused of making false statements to the State Securities Board in connection with its investigation of his failure to register with the board as an investment adviser required by state law.
The Senate is not, at least initially, taking up this article in Paxton’s impeachment trial.
ARTICLE 14- Personal financial statements
Paxton is accused of failing to fully and accurately disclose financial interests in his financial statements filed with the Texas Ethics Commission.
The Senate is not, at least initially, taking up this article in Paxton’s impeachment trial.
ARTICLE 15 – Whistleblower response report
It is alleged that Paxton made or caused to be made multiple false or misleading statements in the lengthy written report issued by his office in response to whistleblower allegations.
ARTICLE 16 – CONSPIRACY AND ATTEMPTED CONSPIRACY
Paxton is accused of conspiring or attempting to conspire with others to commit acts described in one or more articles.
ARTICLE 17 – MISAPPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES
Paxton is accused of misusing his official powers by causing employees to perform services for his benefit and the benefit of others.
ARTICLE 18 – DERELICTION OF DUTY
Paxton is accused of violating the Texas Constitution, his oaths of office, statutes and public policy against public officials acting contrary to the public interest by engaging in acts described in one or more articles.
ARTICLE 19 – UNFITNESS FOR OFFICE
Paxton is accused of engaging in misconduct, private or public, of such character as to indicate his unfitness for office, as shown by the acts described in one or more articles.
ARTICLE 20 – ABUSE OF PUBLIC TRUST
Paxton is accused of using, misusing or failing to use official powers to subvert the lawful operation of the state government and obstruct the fair and impartial administration of justice, bringing the attorney general’s office into scandal and eroding public confidence in state government, as shown by the acts described in one or more articles.
(Associated Press)