Texas’ Republican-led House of Representatives launched historic impeachment proceedings against Attorney General Ken Paxton on Saturday as Donald Trump defended the scandal-plagued GOP official from a vote that could lead on to his ouster.
The House convened within the afternoon to debate whether to question and suspend Paxton over allegations of bribery, abuse of public trust and that he’s unfit for office — just a number of the accusations which have trailed Texas’ top lawyer for many of his three terms.
The hearing sets up what could possibly be a remarkably sudden downfall for one in all the GOP’s most outstanding legal combatants, who in 2020 asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn President Joe Biden’s electoral defeat of Trump. Only two officials in Texas’ nearly 200-year history have been impeached.
Paxton, 60, has called the impeachment proceedings “political theater” based on “hearsay and gossip, parroting long-disproven claims,” and an try to disenfranchise voters who reelected him in November. On Friday, he asked supporters “to peacefully come let their voices be heard on the Capitol tomorrow.”
“Nobody person ought to be above the law, least not the highest law enforcement officer of the state of Texas,” Rep. David Spiller, a Republican member of the committee that investigated Paxton, said in opening statements. Rep. Ann Johnson, a Democratic member, told lawmakers that Texas’ “top cop is on the take.” Rep. Charlie Geren, a Republican committee member, said without elaborating that Paxton had called lawmakers and threatened them with political “consequences.” Because the articles of impeachment were laid out, a number of the lawmakers shook their heads. They’re expected to debate impeachment for 4 hours before voting.
Paxton has been under FBI investigation for years over accusations that he used his office to assist a donor and was individually indicted on securities fraud charges in 2015, though he has yet to face trial. Until this week, his fellow Republicans had taken a muted stance on the allegations.
Lawmakers allied with Paxton tried to discredit the investigation by noting that hired investigators, not panel members, interviewed witnesses. Additionally they said several of the investigators had voted in Democratic primaries, tainting the impeachment, and that they’d too little time to review evidence.
“I perceive it could possibly be political weaponization,” said Rep. Tony Tinderholt, one in all the House’s most conservative members. Republican Rep. John Smithee said the of committee’s presentation, “It’s hearsay, inside hearsay, inside hearsay.”
Impeachment requires just an easy majority within the House. Which means only a small fraction of its 85 Republicans would want to hitch 64 Democrats in voting against him.
If impeached, Paxton could be suspended pending a Senate trial, and it might fall to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott to appoint an interim substitute. Final removal would require a two-thirds vote within the Senate, where Paxton’s wife’s, Angela, is a member.
Texas’ top elected Republicans had been notably quiet about Paxton this week. But on Saturday each Trump and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz got here to his defense, with the senator calling the impeachment process “a travesty” and saying the attorney general’s legal troubles ought to be left to the courts.
“Free Ken Paxton,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social, warning that if House Republicans proceeded with the method, “I’ll fight you.”
Abbott, who lauded Paxton while swearing him in for a 3rd term in January, has remained silent. The governor spoke at a Memorial Day service within the House chamber about three hours before the impeachment proceedings began. Republican House Speaker Dade Phelan also attended however the two appeared to exchange few words, and Abbott left without commenting to reporters.
In a single sense, Paxton’s political peril arrived with dizzying speed: The House committee’s investigation got here to light Tuesday, and by Thursday lawmakers issued 20 articles of impeachment.
But to Paxton’s detractors, the rebuke was years overdue.
In 2014, he admitted to violating Texas securities law, and a 12 months later he was indicted on securities fraud charges in his hometown near Dallas, accused of defrauding investors in a tech startup. He pleaded not guilty to 2 felony counts carrying a possible sentence of 5 to 99 years.
He opened a legal defense fund and accepted $100,000 from an executive whose company was under investigation by Paxton’s office for Medicaid fraud. An extra $50,000 was donated by an Arizona retiree whose son Paxton later hired to a high-ranking job but was soon fired after displaying child pornography in a gathering. In 2020, Paxton intervened in a Colorado mountain community where a Texas donor and college classmate faced removal from his lakeside home under coronavirus orders.
But what ultimately unleased the impeachment push was Paxton’s relationship with Austin real estate developer Nate Paul.
In 2020, eight top aides told the FBI they were concerned Paxton was misusing his office to assist Paul over the developer’s unproven claims that an elaborate conspiracy to steal $200 million of his properties was afoot. The FBI searched Paul’s home in 2019, but he has not been charged and denies wrongdoing. Paxton also told staff members he had an affair with a lady who, it later emerged, worked for Paul.
The impeachment accuses Paxton of attempting to interfere in foreclosure lawsuits and issuing legal opinions to learn Paul. Its bribery charges allege that Paul employed the lady with whom Paxton had an affair in exchange for legal help and that he paid for expensive renovations to the attorney general’s home.
A senior lawyer for Paxton’s office, Chris Hilton, said Friday that the attorney general paid for all repairs and renovations.
Other charges, including lying to investigators, date back to Paxton’s still-pending securities fraud indictment.
4 of the aides who reported Paxton to the FBI later sued under Texas’ whistleblower law, and in February he agreed to settle the case for $3.3 million. The House committee said it was Paxton looking for legislative approval for the payout that sparked their probe.
“But for Paxton’s own request for a taxpayer-funded settlement over his wrongful conduct, Paxton wouldn’t be facing impeachment,” the panel said.
