[INSANE] Texas legislature gives power to SOS to overturn elections

Marched for women's rights and got an abortion ban. Marched for gun control and got unlicensed conceal carry and armed teachers in schools. Marched against police brutality and got tear gassed. Marching for stuff is a tough row to hoe.

 

It did get women the right to vote, the civil rights bill, etc. We know it can work but most people are too busy living their lives not concerned or just not giving a ****.

 

Texas House committee recommends impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton

In an unprecedented move, a Texas House committee voted Thursday to recommend that Attorney General Ken Paxton be impeached and removed from office, citing a yearslong pattern of alleged misconduct and lawbreaking that investigators detailed one day earlier.

During a specially called meeting Thursday afternoon, the House General Investigating Committee voted unanimously to refer articles of impeachment to the full chamber. The House will next decide whether to approve the articles against Paxton, which could lead to the attorney general’s removal from office pending the outcome of a trial to be conducted by the Senate.

No Legislature has impeached an attorney general, an extraordinary step that lawmakers have historically reserved for public officials who faced serious allegations that they had abused their powers.

The decision came minutes after a representative from Paxton’s office demanded Thursday to testify in front of the House committee probing Paxton’s alleged criminal acts and decried the committee’s actions as “illegal.”

Chris Hilton, chief of general litigation for the attorney general’s office, interrupted the five-member panel’s brief meeting to demand to testify on behalf of Paxton’s office. State Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, shook his head and moved forward with the meeting, which went into executive session almost immediately after gaveling in.

“The people deserve to hear from this office in the context of this investigation,” Hilton said. “The voters want Ken Paxton, and this committee — by investigating him, by not allowing us to be heard here today, by never reaching out to us at any time during this investigative process — is trying to thwart the will of the voters. We deserve to be heard here today.”

Hilton told reporters the committee’s actions were illegal under a section of Texas law that says a “state officer may not be removed from office for an act the officer may have committed before the officer’s election to office.”

Hilton argued that the statute meant “any impeachment can only be about conduct since the most recent elections.”

Once the committee returned from meeting in private, members voted to issue “preservation letters” directing the Department of Public Safety and the Texas Facilities Commission to protect pertinent information. The committee did not discuss what information it wanted preserved.

Committee members did not discuss the articles of impeachment during or after the meeting.

“Overturning elections begins behind closed doors,” Paxton said on Twitter in a post that included video of Hilton’s conversation with reporters.

The vote to adopt the articles of impeachment came one day after the committee listened to three hours of testimony detailing allegations pointing to a yearslong pattern of misconduct and questionable actions by Paxton, which included criminal charges for securities fraud and allegations by his former top deputies that Paxton used his office to benefit a friend and political donor.

Many of the allegations detailed Wednesday were already known, but the public airing of them revealed the wide scope of the committee’s investigation into the state’s top lawyer, a member of the ruling Republican Party. The investigative committee has broad power to investigate state officials for wrongdoing, and three weeks ago the House expelled Bryan Slaton, R-Royse City, on its recommendation.

Only the Texas House can bring impeachment proceedings against state officials, which would lead to a trial by the Senate. Under the Texas Constitution, Paxton would be suspended from office pending the outcome of the Senate trial. The constitution also allows the governor to appoint an provisional replacement.

Removal from office would require the support of two-thirds of senators. This has happened only twice in Texas history, to Gov. James Ferguson in 1917 and District Judge O.P. Carrillo in 1975.


During Wednesday’s hearing, investigators told the committee’s three Republicans and two Democrats about allegations that Paxton had repeatedly abused his office to help a friend and political donor, Austin real estate investor Nate Paul. They largely relied on claims made by four former senior employees who filed a whistleblower lawsuit in 2022 arguing that Paxton improperly fired them after they reported concerns about Paxton’s actions to federal and state investigators.

The committee investigators said Paxton may have committed at least three felonies in an effort to help Paul with various legal troubles. These included spending $72,000 in staff labor on tasks that benefited the developer, providing Paul with an internal FBI file related to an investigation into Paul, and hiring an outside lawyer for $25,000 to conduct work that primarily benefited Paul.

Committee investigators also discussed criminal charges that have been pending against Paxton since 2015, when a Collin County grand jury indicted him on two counts of felony securities fraud related to private business deals in 2011. According to those charges, Paxton solicited investors into Servergy Inc. without disclosing that the McKinney tech company was paying him to promote its stock.

Suddenly, the three-term incumbent Paxton found himself in the greatest political peril of his tenure — not because of the FBI, which began investigating him in 2020, but rather from a little-known legislative committee.


While the committee investigators said Paxton may have broken numerous laws, impeachment is ultimately a political process. House members will have broad leeway to decide what is an impeachable offense.

For Democrats, the calculus is simple. They have cast Paxton as corrupt for years and will likely be unanimous in support of impeachment. Some Democrats, including Rep. Ana-Maria Ramos of Richardson, began calling for impeachment Wednesday.

Republicans must wrestle with whether to indict a top state official in their own party, one who is popular with conservative voters and who survived a primary last year in which opponents tried to tar him with similar allegations of misconduct.

Paxton has positioned himself as a champion of far-right causes and an ally of former President Donald Trump. His unsuccessful lawsuit challenging the results of the 2020 presidential election solidified his appeal in conservative legal circles, and Trump later endorsed his reelection bid. A path to Paxton’s survival could include rallying this base.


“Few in America have done more to advance the conservative legal movement,” former Trump adviser Stephen Miller tweeted Thursday. “Stand with Ken.”

Two other top Republicans, Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, have yet to come to Paxton’s defense, both declining to comment on the committee’s allegations against the attorney general.

But Paxton has alienated some House Republicans. He has repeatedly criticized House Speaker Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont, and his leadership as insufficiently conservative. And hours before the investigative committee revealed Tuesday that it had secretly launched a probe into Paxton, the attorney general called on Phelan to resign, pointing to a video of the speaker slurring his words to accuse him of presiding over the House while drunk.

No Republican House members have yet called for Paxton’s impeachment. But Jeff Leach, R-Plano, urged the public to tune into Wednesday’s committee hearing, which he said would discuss “issues of vital importance.”


“Make no mistake,” Leach said on Twitter. “The Texas House will do our job and uphold our oaths of office.”

And Phelan, who in early May cited his role as the House’s presiding officer as the reason why he did not comment on sexual misconduct allegations against Slaton until after the chamber expelled him, has dropped that approach with Paxton. The speaker on Wednesday called the committee investigators’ report “extremely disturbing” and said Paxton “appears to have routinely abused his office for personal gain.”

Republicans for years have fended off questions about Paxton’s legal and ethical issues, variously deferring to courts to decide them and voters to determine if they were disqualifying. A key question is why the Republican-led House is acting against Paxton now.

Phelan said the House had an obligation to vet the whistleblowers’ claims because a proposed settlement between the four former employees and Paxton’s office would have cost $3.3 million — funds the Legislature would have to approve.

Rest of article:
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/25/ken-paxton-impeachment-investigation/

I'm giddy at the possibility of justice being served for this one eyed sob...

 

If they cannot win . . .. Cheat!

Rocket River

 

Texas Republicans pass bills targeting elections administration in Houston-area county

Texas Republicans have approved a pair of bills targeting the elections process in Harris County, the state’s largest and home to Houston, with voting rights activists accusing the GOP of plotting a “power grab” in an increasingly Democratic county.

The measures, which passed the Republican-controlled state House and Senate, now head to the desk of GOP Gov. Greg Abbott.

On Sunday, lawmakers passed legislation known as SB 1933 that would authorize the office of the Texas secretary of state – an Abbott appointee – to “order administrative oversight” of a county elections office if, for instance, a complaint is filed or there’s cause to believe there’s a recurring pattern of problems involving election administration or voter registration. The measure would affect any county that has a population of more than 4 million people – Harris County is the only county in the state that meets that criterion.


Last week, the state House passed a measure along party lines that would eliminate the position of elections administrator in a county with a population of more than 3.5 million people – which, again, would only apply to Harris County. Under that bill, known as SB 1750, the elections administrator’s duties would be transferred to the county tax assessor-collector and county clerk. The Harris County elections administrator, a position created in 2020, is appointed by the county’s election commission, which is Democratic-controlled. The county’s tax assessor-collector and clerk are both Democrats. The measure had passed the state Senate earlier this month. If signed, the law would go into effect on September 1.

Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee, a Democrat, said last week that the county would sue the state over the two bills, which he called “clearly unconstitutional.”

“(Our) state’s constitution bars lawmakers from passing laws that target one specific city or county, putting their personal vendettas over what’s best for Texans,” Menefee said in a statement.

While Republicans have long had a stronghold on Texas, Harris County has leaned more Democratic in recent years. President Joe Biden won the county by double digits in 2020. And Democrat Beto O’Rourke won the county in November’s governor’s race, while losing statewide by double digits to Abbott.

Harris County experienced election problems last year that caused the county’s former elections administrator, Isabel Longoria, to resign amid a mail-in ballot counting discrepancy during the March primary. The problems included damaged ballots that delayed the reporting of results and a vote discrepancy that left thousands of ballots out of the unofficial primary results. The county also experienced issues during the general election, paper ballot shortages, machine malfunctions and delays in opening polling places.

“Voters should have confidence in their elections, and when they see Harris County Elections Administrators botch election after election in 2022 that confidence is shaken,” Houston-area state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, who authored both bills, said last month.

Bettencourt has defended his legislation, saying in a statement that SB 1933 would “ensure the failures, or the fiasco of the general election never occurs again with the Texas Secretary of State oversight of the election process, if necessary.”

But James Slattery, an attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project, a legal advocacy group, said the bills would “open the door for the Governor and his allies to manipulate elections in the nation’s third largest county for their own partisan gain.”

“It is the latest power grab by state officials in a Session dominated by efforts to centralize power and gut the right of local communities to govern themselves,” he said in a statement.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/28/politics/texas-republicans-elections-bill-harris-county/index.html


Breakdown of votes:
https://legiscan.com/TX/rollcall/SB1933/id/1334631

 

^ People aren't paying attention to this because of the impeachment of Paxton, hmmmm...

 

It’s going to play out in the courts. I have no idea how that will go.

 

So all we have left are thoughts and prayers? Better than nothing I suppose...

 

While the expulsion of the House member and Paxton’s impeachment show they there are some limits for the House when it comes to maintaining power they have no limits.

 

One of the top replies to that tweet:


"the United States is a republic, not a democracy"


Every single American citizen who has ever said that is a fascist. And it has nothing to do with being a "Republic". It has to do with the fact that when someone sees voting systems being corrupted by partisan tomfoolery their answer is shrugs arms and state that partisan bias in a voting system is fine because we aren't a democracy.

Like for **** sakes these people have no self awareness at all.

 

I'm not a professor dude. I'm kinda dumb so you need to explain your high level meme jokes about Ben Franklin.

What does Ben have to do with people shouting "this is a republic not a democracy" when they defend partisan efforts to alter election procedures?

Is that an inherent aspect of a Republic? An ideological political party gets to control election procedures? Is that a core tenant of republicanism? Is that what they teach in 4000 level senior political science classes bout republicanism?

 

I’m assuming you mean, “a republic, if you can keep it.”

Republics are governments where the people vote on their leaders to make decisions. The people electing their leaders is critical…voting is critical. To suggest otherwise is to either be ignorant or willfully obtuse. A republic is a form of a democracy. It’s not direct democracy, where the people vote on every matter, but it’s a democracy nonetheless.

 

In all seriousness, how did we get to a point where people will literally defend this ****? This is the exact kind of thing that we’ve always held up as being entirely anti-American…everything we stand against…what the hell happened?

 

On June 25, 2013, the United States Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to use the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act to determine which jurisdictions are subject to the preclearance requirement of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013). The Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of Section 5 itself. The effect of the Shelby County decision is that the jurisdictions identified by the coverage formula in Section 4(b) no longer need to seek preclearance for the new voting changes, unless they are covered by a separate court order entered under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act.

It's been all downhill since...

 

Fascism. It's rising. Some posters want to joke about me using that term often but it ain't going to deter me from calling what what I'm seeing.

 

Just to remind everyone that we are a democratic republic.