how about we stop nominating ****ty candidates?

Quote:

---

Yep, he is solid alright. Claimed 3 homestead exemptions to get better mortgage rates and lower property taxes on all three. Didn't some mouthy democrat up north get caught doing the same thing.

---

We should not forget

• Him taking a $1,000 Mont Blanc pen from a metal detector machine and having to return it to the Sheriff's office once they reviewed the footage and saw him pocket the thing
• Him profiting from land deals along with the Collin County AG Greg Willis. where they allegedly had inside information about rezoning of the property.
• His failure to disclose his investment in Watchguard, the police dashcam company, which received a statewide contract while Paxton was a state rep.

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

These were mostly accusations made by his former staffers during the trial. I guess people can choose to believe they made them up or exaggerated while testifying.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2023/09/08/461911/the-biggest-revelations-from-ken-paxtons-impeachment-trial-so-far/

Quote:

---

Several of Paxton's former top lieutenants in the Attorney General's Office testified in the first four days of the trial. All were conservative Republicans who, though once loyal to Paxton, said they became disillusioned after seeing him allegedly abusing his office on behalf of Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

Investigators alleged Paxton used his office to intervene in a federal investigation into Paul and asked staff in the attorney general's office to modify a legal opinion to benefit his friend and donor all despite several top Paxton staffers and aides pleading with the attorney general to reconsider.

Former first assistant attorney general Jeff Mateer said that Paxton had repeatedly ignored warnings that his intervention on behalf of Paul was improper. Mateer described how Paxton became irate and pushed back on such warnings, and said he was concerned that Paxton may have been blackmailed over an extramarital affair.

"One of the jobs of the first assistant is to protect, in addition to running the office, was to protect the attorney general," Mateer told prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin. "And, quite frankly, I obviously failed at that."

Ryan Bangert, former first deputy assistant of Attorney General Ken Paxton, testifies at the impeachment trial of Paxton at the Capitol on Thursday September 7, 2023.

In testimony that followed Mateer's, former deputy first assistant Ryan Bangert said Paxton's insistence that his staff craft an opinion about foreclosure sales during the pandemic raised alarm bells for a group of eventual whistleblowers. The opinion recommended halting the sales, which would have benefited Paul.

Bangert said his discussion with Paxton on the matter was concerning.

"It was bizarre," he said. "He was acting like a man with a gun to his head."

Bangert said the amount of time spent crafting the opinion added to the group's suspicions.

"We were devoting far more resources to Nate Paul than we ever should have," he said.

Former deputy attorney general for legal counsel Ryan Vassar testified that Paxton had intervened to ensure the Attorney General's Office released a file to Paul containing confidential information regarding a federal investigation into his business affairs. Vassar said Paxton pressured both him and Bangert to provide legal opinions that would have prevented the foreclosure of some of Paul's properties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vassar also described how Paxton arranged for outside counsel to investigate a complaint made by Paul. Attorney Brandon Cammack was hired for the job, looking into what Paul alleged were improper state and federal searches of his home and businesses. Paxton whistleblowers felt a responsibility to report their boss to the FBI.

Witnesses testified they had no choice but to report their boss to federal law enforcement.

"It became clear to me that there was nothing more I could do that the office, the attorney general, was determined to harness the power of our office to fulfill the interests of a single individual against the interests of the state," Bangert said. "In my view, we were signing our professional death warrant. We understood the gravity."

Mateer, Vassar and Bangert were among seven top Paxton staffers who went to the FBI on Sept. 30, 2020.

In explaining why he made the decision, Vassar testified, "I formed a conclusion that General Paxton was using the power and authority of his office to benefit a private individual.

"The concern was that it would only get worse," he added.

Shortly after going to the FBI, Vassar was terminated from his position in the AG's office, allegedly for disclosing confidential information outside the agency. Mateer resigned on Oct. 2, 2020, when faced with the prospect of being put on investigative leave.

Paxton has repeatedly attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, painting them as "rogue" employees. Vassar said the label offended him, and he was close to tears as he testified.

"I worked for the state for eight years as a public servant, as one who values the commitment to public service, to set an example for my kids, the people that I worked with, the people that I managed," he said.

David Maxwell, a longtime Texas Ranger and former head of law enforcement in the Attorney General's Office, testified Friday that Paxton tried to pressure him to open an investigation of federal and state authorities over an FBI search of Paul's home and businesses. Maxwell refused.

"I told him that Nate Paul was a criminal, he was running a Ponzi scheme that would rival Billy Sol Estes, and that if he didn't get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted," Maxwell said.

Maxwell was fired in November 2020, just over a month after he and his colleagues reported Paxton to federal authorities.

Four of Paxton's former top deputies sued Paxton over their terminations, saying they were improperly dismissed as retaliation for going to the FBI. Earlier this year, the group reached a $3.3 million settlement with Paxton, who then asked the Texas Legislature to foot the bill. His request allegedly sparked the investigation that ultimately led to Paxton's impeachment.

---

BusterAg said:

---

Waco Ag said:

---

Yep, he is solid alright. Claimed 3 homestead exemptions to get better mortgage rates and lower property taxes on all three. Didn't some mouthy democrat up north get caught doing the same thing.

---

Is there proof of this? First I am hearing of this.

---

I can't remember if it was discussed on here or not, but I saw it in the newspaper

Quote:

---

I can't remember if it was discussed on here or not, but I saw it in the newspaper

---

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ken-angela-paxton-mortgage-primary-residence-homestead-exemption/

Quote:

---

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, are longtime owners of a $1.5 million house in a gated community in McKinney. In 2015, they snapped up a second home in Austin. Then another.

The problem: Mortgages signed by the Paxtons contained inaccurate statements declaring that each of those three houses was their primary residence, enabling the now-estranged couple to improperly lock in low interest rates, according to an Associated Press review of public records.

Paxton collected two 'homestead' tax breaks

In 2018, the Paxtons simultaneously collected homestead property tax breaks on their family's home in suburban Dallas, as well as on a $1.1 million home in Austin, property records and tax statements show.

---

Paxton's baggage isn't ideal, but Talarico supports horrible policies. Without question I'll vote for Paxton in that scenario.

Cornyn wasted such a good opportunity representing Texas. I will vote for him if he's the nominee in the general, but he's untrustworthy to live up to what he campaigns on as far as I'm concerned.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

These were mostly accusations made by his former staffers during the trial. I guess people can choose to believe they made them up or exaggerated while testifying.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2023/09/08/461911/the-biggest-revelations-from-ken-paxtons-impeachment-trial-so-far/

Quote:

---

Several of Paxton's former top lieutenants in the Attorney General's Office testified in the first four days of the trial. All were conservative Republicans who, though once loyal to Paxton, said they became disillusioned after seeing him allegedly abusing his office on behalf of Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

Investigators alleged Paxton used his office to intervene in a federal investigation into Paul and asked staff in the attorney general's office to modify a legal opinion to benefit his friend and donor all despite several top Paxton staffers and aides pleading with the attorney general to reconsider.

Former first assistant attorney general Jeff Mateer said that Paxton had repeatedly ignored warnings that his intervention on behalf of Paul was improper. Mateer described how Paxton became irate and pushed back on such warnings, and said he was concerned that Paxton may have been blackmailed over an extramarital affair.

"One of the jobs of the first assistant is to protect, in addition to running the office, was to protect the attorney general," Mateer told prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin. "And, quite frankly, I obviously failed at that."

Ryan Bangert, former first deputy assistant of Attorney General Ken Paxton, testifies at the impeachment trial of Paxton at the Capitol on Thursday September 7, 2023.

In testimony that followed Mateer's, former deputy first assistant Ryan Bangert said Paxton's insistence that his staff craft an opinion about foreclosure sales during the pandemic raised alarm bells for a group of eventual whistleblowers. The opinion recommended halting the sales, which would have benefited Paul.

Bangert said his discussion with Paxton on the matter was concerning.

"It was bizarre," he said. "He was acting like a man with a gun to his head."

Bangert said the amount of time spent crafting the opinion added to the group's suspicions.

"We were devoting far more resources to Nate Paul than we ever should have," he said.

Former deputy attorney general for legal counsel Ryan Vassar testified that Paxton had intervened to ensure the Attorney General's Office released a file to Paul containing confidential information regarding a federal investigation into his business affairs. Vassar said Paxton pressured both him and Bangert to provide legal opinions that would have prevented the foreclosure of some of Paul's properties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vassar also described how Paxton arranged for outside counsel to investigate a complaint made by Paul. Attorney Brandon Cammack was hired for the job, looking into what Paul alleged were improper state and federal searches of his home and businesses. Paxton whistleblowers felt a responsibility to report their boss to the FBI.

Witnesses testified they had no choice but to report their boss to federal law enforcement.

"It became clear to me that there was nothing more I could do that the office, the attorney general, was determined to harness the power of our office to fulfill the interests of a single individual against the interests of the state," Bangert said. "In my view, we were signing our professional death warrant. We understood the gravity."

Mateer, Vassar and Bangert were among seven top Paxton staffers who went to the FBI on Sept. 30, 2020.

In explaining why he made the decision, Vassar testified, "I formed a conclusion that General Paxton was using the power and authority of his office to benefit a private individual.

"The concern was that it would only get worse," he added.

Shortly after going to the FBI, Vassar was terminated from his position in the AG's office, allegedly for disclosing confidential information outside the agency. Mateer resigned on Oct. 2, 2020, when faced with the prospect of being put on investigative leave.

Paxton has repeatedly attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, painting them as "rogue" employees. Vassar said the label offended him, and he was close to tears as he testified.

"I worked for the state for eight years as a public servant, as one who values the commitment to public service, to set an example for my kids, the people that I worked with, the people that I managed," he said.

David Maxwell, a longtime Texas Ranger and former head of law enforcement in the Attorney General's Office, testified Friday that Paxton tried to pressure him to open an investigation of federal and state authorities over an FBI search of Paul's home and businesses. Maxwell refused.

"I told him that Nate Paul was a criminal, he was running a Ponzi scheme that would rival Billy Sol Estes, and that if he didn't get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted," Maxwell said.

Maxwell was fired in November 2020, just over a month after he and his colleagues reported Paxton to federal authorities.

Four of Paxton's former top deputies sued Paxton over their terminations, saying they were improperly dismissed as retaliation for going to the FBI. Earlier this year, the group reached a $3.3 million settlement with Paxton, who then asked the Texas Legislature to foot the bill. His request allegedly sparked the investigation that ultimately led to Paxton's impeachment.

---

---

Almost all of the testimony in the impeachment was hearsay. They testified that Paxton did this, but under cross, they had to admit none was actually witnessed.

Will Paxton vote for the SAVE act, yes or no?

I don't care if my brain surgeon is an ******* who cheats on his taxes or his wife. I just want him to remove the damn tumor.

SHSU-AG said:

---

Sometime you have to vote for a chitty Republican candidate to keep a chittier Democrat candidate out!

---

The battle cry of the Republic!

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

buda91 said:

---

I'm looking for guidance on this question, and I value the thoughts and opinions on this board. Is Paxton a corrupt SOB with too much baggage, or is this just another example of the left dragging down every conservative that stands up to them? Or somewhere in the middle?

---

Quote:

---

.3. Securities Fraud Indictment

Paxton was indicted in 2015 on three felony charges of securities fraud.

The Allegations: Paxton allegedly persuaded investors to buy stock in a tech company called Servergy without disclosing that he would receive a financial commission.

Outcome: The years-long case was finally resolved in March 2024 when Paxton reached a pretrial diversion agreement. The deal required him to complete 100 hours of community service, pay thousands in restitution, and take legal ethics classes to avoid a trial.

---

---

Joe Straus' buddy Byron Cook filed complaints against Paxton for suggesting Servergy in their investment circle. Paxton got some referral fee of about $100 worth of stock (100,000 shares valued at $.001 now worth 0).

This was political payback for daring to challenge Straus for speaker of the house in 2011 and maybe beating Straus buddy Dan Branch for AG. The Establishment block (Dade Phelan) continued the battle with impeachment. Go watch the trial in the Senate to see how weak their case was.
https://senate.texas.gov/av-archive.php?sess=88&yr=2023&mo=09&lang=en#av-arch-table

The Collective said:

---

Fitch said:

---

With Paxton the likely candidate, I may well stay home Nov. 3. I know for a fact others in my social circle (all straight line Trump voters) will do the same, or skip voting for him at least. Policies are generally all fine, but the man isn't worth my endorsement.

Not ideal for sure. Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic.

---

Is the intent to attempt to teach the GOP a lesson by letting the left loons + suburban housewives elect a dude that makes Joel Osteen look like Wes Huff?

---

Nah, no intent to teach a lesson. Just not going to vote for someone with the baggage. Wasn't excited for a Cornyn repeat. Would have happily supported Wes Hunt.

DG-Ag said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Not a chance in hell I do anything that risks putting a Dem closer to taking an office. I'll vote for a terrible Republican candidate as long as the candidate is part of keeping lunatic democrats out of power. They are far too reckless and sociopathic to be given even a chance at it.

---

Sadly, this is what it's become for me. I know the "conservatives" I vote for won't end up doing any of the things they promise to do. I just hope they keep the lunatic fringe from doing what they promise to do.

---

And this mentality is why our country is going to hell. We will never get better people as politicians if you reward bad people as politicians. Would you like a family member to be like Paxton? Would you want a business relationship with someone like Paxton? If your answer is no, then why are you ok with a politician representing your interests being Paxton. All because you've got such an algorithmic view of politics consuming emotional porn from media that no longer requires you to have a complex thought. Not all politicians are corrupt pieces of ****, but Paxton is.

SHSU-AG said:

---

Fitch said:

---

With Paxton the likely candidate, I may well stay home Nov. 3. I know for a fact others in my social circle (all straight line Trump voters) will do the same, or skip voting for him at least. Policies are generally all fine, but the man isn't worth my endorsement.

Not ideal for sure. Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic.

---

That's exactly what will get Talarico in the Senate. Sometime you have to vote for a chitty Republican candidate to keep a chittier Democrat candidate out!

---

Oh no it's the end of the world. Then we could maybe run a good person that's Republican against him 6 years from now and we might not even have a country then because Talarico isn't a serial adulterer. Better yet you could just run a decent human being today and Talarico would have no chance It all just makes so much sense.

Science Denier said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

These were mostly accusations made by his former staffers during the trial. I guess people can choose to believe they made them up or exaggerated while testifying.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2023/09/08/461911/the-biggest-revelations-from-ken-paxtons-impeachment-trial-so-far/

Quote:

---

Several of Paxton's former top lieutenants in the Attorney General's Office testified in the first four days of the trial. All were conservative Republicans who, though once loyal to Paxton, said they became disillusioned after seeing him allegedly abusing his office on behalf of Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

Investigators alleged Paxton used his office to intervene in a federal investigation into Paul and asked staff in the attorney general's office to modify a legal opinion to benefit his friend and donor all despite several top Paxton staffers and aides pleading with the attorney general to reconsider.

Former first assistant attorney general Jeff Mateer said that Paxton had repeatedly ignored warnings that his intervention on behalf of Paul was improper. Mateer described how Paxton became irate and pushed back on such warnings, and said he was concerned that Paxton may have been blackmailed over an extramarital affair.

"One of the jobs of the first assistant is to protect, in addition to running the office, was to protect the attorney general," Mateer told prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin. "And, quite frankly, I obviously failed at that."

Ryan Bangert, former first deputy assistant of Attorney General Ken Paxton, testifies at the impeachment trial of Paxton at the Capitol on Thursday September 7, 2023.

In testimony that followed Mateer's, former deputy first assistant Ryan Bangert said Paxton's insistence that his staff craft an opinion about foreclosure sales during the pandemic raised alarm bells for a group of eventual whistleblowers. The opinion recommended halting the sales, which would have benefited Paul.

Bangert said his discussion with Paxton on the matter was concerning.

"It was bizarre," he said. "He was acting like a man with a gun to his head."

Bangert said the amount of time spent crafting the opinion added to the group's suspicions.

"We were devoting far more resources to Nate Paul than we ever should have," he said.

Former deputy attorney general for legal counsel Ryan Vassar testified that Paxton had intervened to ensure the Attorney General's Office released a file to Paul containing confidential information regarding a federal investigation into his business affairs. Vassar said Paxton pressured both him and Bangert to provide legal opinions that would have prevented the foreclosure of some of Paul's properties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vassar also described how Paxton arranged for outside counsel to investigate a complaint made by Paul. Attorney Brandon Cammack was hired for the job, looking into what Paul alleged were improper state and federal searches of his home and businesses. Paxton whistleblowers felt a responsibility to report their boss to the FBI.

Witnesses testified they had no choice but to report their boss to federal law enforcement.

"It became clear to me that there was nothing more I could do that the office, the attorney general, was determined to harness the power of our office to fulfill the interests of a single individual against the interests of the state," Bangert said. "In my view, we were signing our professional death warrant. We understood the gravity."

Mateer, Vassar and Bangert were among seven top Paxton staffers who went to the FBI on Sept. 30, 2020.

In explaining why he made the decision, Vassar testified, "I formed a conclusion that General Paxton was using the power and authority of his office to benefit a private individual.

"The concern was that it would only get worse," he added.

Shortly after going to the FBI, Vassar was terminated from his position in the AG's office, allegedly for disclosing confidential information outside the agency. Mateer resigned on Oct. 2, 2020, when faced with the prospect of being put on investigative leave.

Paxton has repeatedly attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, painting them as "rogue" employees. Vassar said the label offended him, and he was close to tears as he testified.

"I worked for the state for eight years as a public servant, as one who values the commitment to public service, to set an example for my kids, the people that I worked with, the people that I managed," he said.

David Maxwell, a longtime Texas Ranger and former head of law enforcement in the Attorney General's Office, testified Friday that Paxton tried to pressure him to open an investigation of federal and state authorities over an FBI search of Paul's home and businesses. Maxwell refused.

"I told him that Nate Paul was a criminal, he was running a Ponzi scheme that would rival Billy Sol Estes, and that if he didn't get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted," Maxwell said.

Maxwell was fired in November 2020, just over a month after he and his colleagues reported Paxton to federal authorities.

Four of Paxton's former top deputies sued Paxton over their terminations, saying they were improperly dismissed as retaliation for going to the FBI. Earlier this year, the group reached a $3.3 million settlement with Paxton, who then asked the Texas Legislature to foot the bill. His request allegedly sparked the investigation that ultimately led to Paxton's impeachment.

---

---

Almost all of the testimony in the impeachment was hearsay. They testified that Paxton did this, but under cross, they had to admit none was actually witnessed.

---

Like I said, you can choose to believe all of the whistleblowers made it up, including what would amount to filing a false report with the FBI. Would not be my conclusion but just sharing what the OP was asking for.

Windy City Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Yep, he is solid alright. Claimed 3 homestead exemptions to get better mortgage rates and lower property taxes on all three. Didn't some mouthy democrat up north get caught doing the same thing.

---

We should not forget

• Him taking a $1,000 Mont Blanc pen from a metal detector machine and having to return it to the Sheriff's office once they reviewed the footage and saw him pocket the thing
• Him profiting from land deals along with the Collin County AG Greg Willis. where they allegedly had inside information about rezoning of the property.
• His failure to disclose his investment in Watchguard, the police dashcam company, which received a statewide contract while Paxton was a state rep.

---

We love it when our politicians rob from us now. It's a small price to pay for awful people to carve up this country and steal from us to own the libs.

You have no issue with Trump and all his baggage but take issue with Paxton? What?

Quote:

---

We will never get better people as politicians if you reward bad people as politicians.

---

No, we will never get better people as politicians when one side is so committed to lying and prosecuting the other side into submission.

The more Democrats go below the belt in trying to portray good Republican leaders as evil racists/fascists or threaten those in office (and their families like some SC members), or prosecute them with jail time...the ones willing to fight back are the ones with baggage who aren't polite or kind like Trump and Paxton.

All the Democrats are doing is creating more Trumps and Paxtons. Then they rage when they get elected. They feed this.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

These were mostly accusations made by his former staffers during the trial. I guess people can choose to believe they made them up or exaggerated while testifying.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2023/09/08/461911/the-biggest-revelations-from-ken-paxtons-impeachment-trial-so-far/

Quote:

---

Several of Paxton's former top lieutenants in the Attorney General's Office testified in the first four days of the trial. All were conservative Republicans who, though once loyal to Paxton, said they became disillusioned after seeing him allegedly abusing his office on behalf of Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

Investigators alleged Paxton used his office to intervene in a federal investigation into Paul and asked staff in the attorney general's office to modify a legal opinion to benefit his friend and donor all despite several top Paxton staffers and aides pleading with the attorney general to reconsider.

Former first assistant attorney general Jeff Mateer said that Paxton had repeatedly ignored warnings that his intervention on behalf of Paul was improper. Mateer described how Paxton became irate and pushed back on such warnings, and said he was concerned that Paxton may have been blackmailed over an extramarital affair.

"One of the jobs of the first assistant is to protect, in addition to running the office, was to protect the attorney general," Mateer told prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin. "And, quite frankly, I obviously failed at that."

Ryan Bangert, former first deputy assistant of Attorney General Ken Paxton, testifies at the impeachment trial of Paxton at the Capitol on Thursday September 7, 2023.

In testimony that followed Mateer's, former deputy first assistant Ryan Bangert said Paxton's insistence that his staff craft an opinion about foreclosure sales during the pandemic raised alarm bells for a group of eventual whistleblowers. The opinion recommended halting the sales, which would have benefited Paul.

Bangert said his discussion with Paxton on the matter was concerning.

"It was bizarre," he said. "He was acting like a man with a gun to his head."

Bangert said the amount of time spent crafting the opinion added to the group's suspicions.

"We were devoting far more resources to Nate Paul than we ever should have," he said.

Former deputy attorney general for legal counsel Ryan Vassar testified that Paxton had intervened to ensure the Attorney General's Office released a file to Paul containing confidential information regarding a federal investigation into his business affairs. Vassar said Paxton pressured both him and Bangert to provide legal opinions that would have prevented the foreclosure of some of Paul's properties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vassar also described how Paxton arranged for outside counsel to investigate a complaint made by Paul. Attorney Brandon Cammack was hired for the job, looking into what Paul alleged were improper state and federal searches of his home and businesses. Paxton whistleblowers felt a responsibility to report their boss to the FBI.

Witnesses testified they had no choice but to report their boss to federal law enforcement.

"It became clear to me that there was nothing more I could do that the office, the attorney general, was determined to harness the power of our office to fulfill the interests of a single individual against the interests of the state," Bangert said. "In my view, we were signing our professional death warrant. We understood the gravity."

Mateer, Vassar and Bangert were among seven top Paxton staffers who went to the FBI on Sept. 30, 2020.

In explaining why he made the decision, Vassar testified, "I formed a conclusion that General Paxton was using the power and authority of his office to benefit a private individual.

"The concern was that it would only get worse," he added.

Shortly after going to the FBI, Vassar was terminated from his position in the AG's office, allegedly for disclosing confidential information outside the agency. Mateer resigned on Oct. 2, 2020, when faced with the prospect of being put on investigative leave.

Paxton has repeatedly attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, painting them as "rogue" employees. Vassar said the label offended him, and he was close to tears as he testified.

"I worked for the state for eight years as a public servant, as one who values the commitment to public service, to set an example for my kids, the people that I worked with, the people that I managed," he said.

David Maxwell, a longtime Texas Ranger and former head of law enforcement in the Attorney General's Office, testified Friday that Paxton tried to pressure him to open an investigation of federal and state authorities over an FBI search of Paul's home and businesses. Maxwell refused.

"I told him that Nate Paul was a criminal, he was running a Ponzi scheme that would rival Billy Sol Estes, and that if he didn't get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted," Maxwell said.

Maxwell was fired in November 2020, just over a month after he and his colleagues reported Paxton to federal authorities.

Four of Paxton's former top deputies sued Paxton over their terminations, saying they were improperly dismissed as retaliation for going to the FBI. Earlier this year, the group reached a $3.3 million settlement with Paxton, who then asked the Texas Legislature to foot the bill. His request allegedly sparked the investigation that ultimately led to Paxton's impeachment.

---

---

Almost all of the testimony in the impeachment was hearsay. They testified that Paxton did this, but under cross, they had to admit none was actually witnessed.

---

Like I said, you can choose to believe all of the whistleblowers made it up, including what would amount to filing a false report with the FBI. Would not be my conclusion but just sharing what the OP was asking for.

---

It's not what one believes. The testimony was all hearsay. Now, you can chose to believe that the people that told the actual witnesses were telling the truth even though those wouldn't testify. But testimony is hearsay if the witness testifying didn't see what he's testifying to. That's not a netted of believing or not believing.

Cornyn has done nothing for Texas and sided with Biden on gun control and immigration. He was saying it was not Trumps time again to run for President. The buddies u to Trump like he's been with him the whole time. I'm sick of having to vote for Cornyn in elections. Aren't y'all?

Fitch said:

---

With Paxton the likely candidate, I may well stay home Nov. 3. I know for a fact others in my social circle (all straight line Trump voters) will do the same, or skip voting for him at least. Policies are generally all fine, but the man isn't worth my endorsement.

Not ideal for sure. Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic.

---

Well you sure aren't doing your part.

I'm voting for Paxton!

Gordo14 said:

---

DG-Ag said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Not a chance in hell I do anything that risks putting a Dem closer to taking an office. I'll vote for a terrible Republican candidate as long as the candidate is part of keeping lunatic democrats out of power. They are far too reckless and sociopathic to be given even a chance at it.

---

Sadly, this is what it's become for me. I know the "conservatives" I vote for won't end up doing any of the things they promise to do. I just hope they keep the lunatic fringe from doing what they promise to do.

---

And this mentality is why our country is going to hell. We will never get better people as politicians if you reward bad people as politicians. Would you like a family member to be like Paxton? Would you want a business relationship with someone like Paxton? If your answer is no, then why are you ok with a politician representing your interests being Paxton. All because you've got such an algorithmic view of politics consuming emotional porn from media that no longer requires you to have a complex thought. Not all politicians are corrupt pieces of ****, but Paxton is.

---

I wasn't specifically mentioning Paxton in my post to which you replied. I'm bemoaning the fact that neither republican vying for the office are good choices - for different reasons. I'm also, bemoaning the fact that "conservatives" lately - at least in my view - are not doing what they say they're going to do once they get in office. But those are the only choices I have when I go to the poll.

So, am I to assume that if comes down to Paxton versus Talarico you're going democrat.

Jasmine " ghetto" Crockett endorsed Cornyn and has wonderful things to say about him.

Enough said.

Science Denier said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

These were mostly accusations made by his former staffers during the trial. I guess people can choose to believe they made them up or exaggerated while testifying.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2023/09/08/461911/the-biggest-revelations-from-ken-paxtons-impeachment-trial-so-far/

Quote:

---

Several of Paxton's former top lieutenants in the Attorney General's Office testified in the first four days of the trial. All were conservative Republicans who, though once loyal to Paxton, said they became disillusioned after seeing him allegedly abusing his office on behalf of Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

Investigators alleged Paxton used his office to intervene in a federal investigation into Paul and asked staff in the attorney general's office to modify a legal opinion to benefit his friend and donor all despite several top Paxton staffers and aides pleading with the attorney general to reconsider.

Former first assistant attorney general Jeff Mateer said that Paxton had repeatedly ignored warnings that his intervention on behalf of Paul was improper. Mateer described how Paxton became irate and pushed back on such warnings, and said he was concerned that Paxton may have been blackmailed over an extramarital affair.

"One of the jobs of the first assistant is to protect, in addition to running the office, was to protect the attorney general," Mateer told prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin. "And, quite frankly, I obviously failed at that."

Ryan Bangert, former first deputy assistant of Attorney General Ken Paxton, testifies at the impeachment trial of Paxton at the Capitol on Thursday September 7, 2023.

In testimony that followed Mateer's, former deputy first assistant Ryan Bangert said Paxton's insistence that his staff craft an opinion about foreclosure sales during the pandemic raised alarm bells for a group of eventual whistleblowers. The opinion recommended halting the sales, which would have benefited Paul.

Bangert said his discussion with Paxton on the matter was concerning.

"It was bizarre," he said. "He was acting like a man with a gun to his head."

Bangert said the amount of time spent crafting the opinion added to the group's suspicions.

"We were devoting far more resources to Nate Paul than we ever should have," he said.

Former deputy attorney general for legal counsel Ryan Vassar testified that Paxton had intervened to ensure the Attorney General's Office released a file to Paul containing confidential information regarding a federal investigation into his business affairs. Vassar said Paxton pressured both him and Bangert to provide legal opinions that would have prevented the foreclosure of some of Paul's properties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vassar also described how Paxton arranged for outside counsel to investigate a complaint made by Paul. Attorney Brandon Cammack was hired for the job, looking into what Paul alleged were improper state and federal searches of his home and businesses. Paxton whistleblowers felt a responsibility to report their boss to the FBI.

Witnesses testified they had no choice but to report their boss to federal law enforcement.

"It became clear to me that there was nothing more I could do that the office, the attorney general, was determined to harness the power of our office to fulfill the interests of a single individual against the interests of the state," Bangert said. "In my view, we were signing our professional death warrant. We understood the gravity."

Mateer, Vassar and Bangert were among seven top Paxton staffers who went to the FBI on Sept. 30, 2020.

In explaining why he made the decision, Vassar testified, "I formed a conclusion that General Paxton was using the power and authority of his office to benefit a private individual.

"The concern was that it would only get worse," he added.

Shortly after going to the FBI, Vassar was terminated from his position in the AG's office, allegedly for disclosing confidential information outside the agency. Mateer resigned on Oct. 2, 2020, when faced with the prospect of being put on investigative leave.

Paxton has repeatedly attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, painting them as "rogue" employees. Vassar said the label offended him, and he was close to tears as he testified.

"I worked for the state for eight years as a public servant, as one who values the commitment to public service, to set an example for my kids, the people that I worked with, the people that I managed," he said.

David Maxwell, a longtime Texas Ranger and former head of law enforcement in the Attorney General's Office, testified Friday that Paxton tried to pressure him to open an investigation of federal and state authorities over an FBI search of Paul's home and businesses. Maxwell refused.

"I told him that Nate Paul was a criminal, he was running a Ponzi scheme that would rival Billy Sol Estes, and that if he didn't get away from this individual and stop doing what he was doing, he was going to get himself indicted," Maxwell said.

Maxwell was fired in November 2020, just over a month after he and his colleagues reported Paxton to federal authorities.

Four of Paxton's former top deputies sued Paxton over their terminations, saying they were improperly dismissed as retaliation for going to the FBI. Earlier this year, the group reached a $3.3 million settlement with Paxton, who then asked the Texas Legislature to foot the bill. His request allegedly sparked the investigation that ultimately led to Paxton's impeachment.

---

---

Almost all of the testimony in the impeachment was hearsay. They testified that Paxton did this, but under cross, they had to admit none was actually witnessed.

---

Like I said, you can choose to believe all of the whistleblowers made it up, including what would amount to filing a false report with the FBI. Would not be my conclusion but just sharing what the OP was asking for.

---

It's not what one believes. The testimony was all hearsay. Now, you can chose to believe that the people that told the actual witnesses were telling the truth even though those wouldn't testify. But testimony is hearsay if the witness testifying didn't see what he's testifying to. That's not a netted of believing or not believing.

---

It was not "all hearsay". There were multiple people who testified about things they witnessed firsthand.

Here's a summary again featuring a few different sources, some of which are behind a paywall so I'm sharing the AI summary:

Quote:

---

A substantial amount of the prosecution's case was actually based on direct, firsthand testimony from senior aides and staff who personally interacted with Ken Paxton, saw internal actions, attended meetings, or received direct instructions from him.

Here are the main categories of testimony that were not hearsay meaning the witnesses were describing things they personally observed or participated in:

Former top deputies describing direct interactions with Paxton

Witnesses like Jeff Mateer, Ryan Bangert, Ryan Vassar, and David Maxwell testified that they personally:

Met with Paxton about Nate Paul
Warned Paxton directly that Paul appeared dishonest or dangerous
Observed Paxton push the Attorney General's office to intervene on Paul's behalf
Participated in internal discussions about legal concerns
Decided to report Paxton to the FBI after those experiences

For example:

Bangert testified about personally trying to convince Paxton to cut ties with Nate Paul.
Maxwell described firsthand concerns about legal irregularities involving Paul-related investigations.
Multiple aides testified they directly witnessed pressure being applied inside the AG's office regarding Paul's legal matters.

Internal office actions and documents

There was also direct evidence involving:

Emails
Memoranda
Internal communications
Official actions inside the Attorney General's office

Witnesses authenticated and explained documents they personally handled or created.

For example:

Emails allegedly showed Nate Paul and his lawyers influencing actions by a special prosecutor.
Senior staff documented repeated warnings to Paxton.
Witnesses testified about specific meetings, requests, and directives they personally saw happen.

Personal aide testimony

One of the more damaging firsthand accounts reportedly came from a former aide who:

transported documents between Paxton and Nate Paul,
witnessed discussions related to home renovations,
and observed interactions suggesting Paul was providing benefits to Paxton.

Paxton's defense argued much of the corruption narrative depended on those kinds of indirect inferences rather than a direct "smoking gun" witness saying:

"I heard Ken Paxton explicitly agree to a bribe."

So the prosecution did have substantial firsthand testimony about unusual conduct, internal pressure, and office actions. The debate was whether that firsthand evidence proved actual bribery/corruption beyond political suspicion and circumstantial inference.

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Not a chance in hell I do anything that risks putting a Dem closer to taking an office. I'll vote for a terrible Republican candidate as long as the candidate is part of keeping lunatic democrats out of power. They are far too reckless and sociopathic to be given even a chance at it.

---

No ***** I've voted for Cornyn for years. I voted for Bob Dole and John McCain. Mitt Romney too. The time to complain is during the primaries and vote. I'll be voting for Abbott even though he has a big responsibly with the mess in North Dallas.

BusterAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Alleged Favors: Paxton allegedly directed his agency to intervene in Paul's business disputes, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation, and provided Paul with confidential law enforcement files.

---

Discovery on whether or not anything illegal happened here should be pretty conclusive.

These all read as nothingburgers to me.

---

You mean a politician made a few phone calls on behalf of one of his biggest donors?

Burn it all down!!!!

10 years ago, I had no idea what I was getting with Trump, but I knew what I would get with Hillary.

I'm not sure what I will get with Paxton, but I know that Cornyn has no interest in serving Texas or advancing conservative issues.

Windy City Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

I can't remember if it was discussed on here or not, but I saw it in the newspaper

---

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ken-angela-paxton-mortgage-primary-residence-homestead-exemption/

Quote:

---

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, are longtime owners of a $1.5 million house in a gated community in McKinney. In 2015, they snapped up a second home in Austin. Then another.

The problem: Mortgages signed by the Paxtons contained inaccurate statements declaring that each of those three houses was their primary residence, enabling the now-estranged couple to improperly lock in low interest rates, according to an Associated Press review of public records.

Paxton collected two 'homestead' tax breaks

In 2018, the Paxtons simultaneously collected homestead property tax breaks on their family's home in suburban Dallas, as well as on a $1.1 million home in Austin, property records and tax statements show.

---

---

1) Apparently this isn't even against the law when a Fed Governor does it.

2) The first thing about claiming the next home you buy as your new homestead is not illegal if it is true.

3) only one year on the double homestead exemption? Easily could have been a mistake that is usually corrected with a small fine.


It just seems to me that the bar set for this guy is a lot higher than every other politician in the system.

Gordo14 said:

---

Not all politicians are corrupt pieces of ****, but Paxton is.

---

After looking at the evidence on this thread, I have concluded that this is complete hearsay.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Almost all of the testimony in the impeachment was hearsay. They testified that Paxton did this, but under cross, they had to admit none was actually witnessed.

---

Like I said, you can choose to believe all of the whistleblowers made it up, including what would amount to filing a false report with the FBI. Would not be my conclusion but just sharing what the OP was asking for.

---

Um, this happens all the time to perfectly fine human beings.

Fitch said:

---

With Paxton the likely candidate, I may well stay home Nov. 3. I know for a fact others in my social circle (all straight line Trump voters) will do the same, or skip voting for him at least. Policies are generally all fine, but the man isn't worth my endorsement.

Not ideal for sure. Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic.

---

Why do you "Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic"?

You said you're probably staying home, and hoping others do the heavy lifting that you are not willing to do, so why do you even have an opinion at all?

It's a choice between a flawed Republican and a Democrat who runs counter to everything most of us stand for.

Either you decide, or someone will decide for you. Don't make a simple thing complicated.

Fitch said:

---

With Paxton the likely candidate, I may well stay home Nov. 3. I know for a fact others in my social circle (all straight line Trump voters) will do the same, or skip voting for him at least. Policies are generally all fine, but the man isn't worth my endorsement.

Not ideal for sure. Hope enough folks show up to keep out the dem's pet heretic.

---

But a commie gun grabber would get your vote?

valvemonkey91 said:

---

4 more Paxton votes from my household today. **** Cornyn. I don't care if Paxton screwed around on his wife. Not my circus. Not my monkeys.

---

I care but he's not up for sainthood and the choice is him or Cornyn who was in the gang of 8 and ready to sell us all out to the commies on immigration

Cornyn is your typical limp wrist politician who follows what the party and what the consultants tell him to do

Paxton has at least taken on the establishment and won at times

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He also retaliated against 8 AAG's who were whistleblowers in the state Attorney General office. One whistleblower could be a personal vendetta. Eight means there's smoke.

---

I am friends with a guy who worked for him then and now. This guy has impeccable character. I'll trust him over clowns who attempted a mutiny of their boss.

---

Ditto. I did conservative campus politics with this guy, and he is ideologically conservative as they come.