Politics Random, Random

[ti-amie]

Here's his full post so you don't get counted among Elmo's minions.

[patrick]

DeSanitis will be officially entering the 2024 President race at 6 PM EDT tomorrow announcing it on Elon Musk Twitter Spaces

[ti-amie]

[ti-amie]

[ti-amie]

[ti-amie]

How a $3.3M settlement against Texas AG Ken Paxton put him on path to impeachment vote
Tony Plohetski
Austin American-Statesman

When the American-Statesman broke the news in October 2020 about damning allegations by members of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s top staff that they reported to the FBI, most Texas Republicans remained reserved in their response.

Weeks later, when a whistleblower lawsuit brought by four plaintiffs revealed more specifics – including accusations that Paxton used his position to help a wealthy donor and possibly received a home remodel in exchange – GOP leaders were largely mum.

The same thing happened when The Associated Press reported in November 2020 that Paxton had arranged for the donor, Nate Paul, to employ his mistress. The reaction by his party remained largely muted.

What finally sparked the bipartisan push to impeach Paxton this week – three years after his alleged misdeeds had been widely reported? It was the money.

A statement from House Speaker Dade Phelan’s spokeswoman and a letter obtained Friday by the Statesman indicate that Paxton asking taxpayers to pay a $3.3 million settlement to the whistleblowers triggered a secret inquiry by a House investigations committee that set the impeachment effort in motion.

“This process was initiated as a result of the attorney general’s request for $3.3 million in state funds in order to settle with whistleblowers,” spokeswoman Cait Wittman said. “The attorney general made this demand of the Legislature without providing sufficient information or evidence in support of his request.”

The memo from the House Committee on General Investigating to 150 House members made the connection even more explicitly.

“We cannot overemphasize the fact that, but for Paxton’s own request for taxpayer-funded settlement over his wrongful conduct, Paxton would not be facing impeachment in the House,” it stated.

Many of the 20 articles of impeachment filed by the investigations committee closely mirror the widely reported allegations the whistleblowers made in 2020.

Paxton has said the investigation is “deceitful” and that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself.

Meanwhile, the proposed $3.3 million settlement also has not been approved and likely will not be this legislative session, which ends Monday.

From the time that the whistleblowers first made the allegations until now, lawmakers got through the 2021 legislative session without taking action against Paxton, such as limiting his office budget, often seen as an effort to curtail an elected official’s power.

And despite the allegations generating state and national headlines, Paxton was reelected in November to a third term in office. He has said that Texas voters knew about the allegations. Paxton also was charged in 2015 with securities fraud in state District Court in a case that has not gone to trial.

Paxton also has taken steps to block the whistleblowers' suit, contending that the state’s whistleblower law does not protect people who report crimes to law enforcement if an elected official is accused of participating in the crime. The court rejected that argument, which Paxton appealed. The appeal locked the case for nearly two years, preventing plaintiffs from collecting evidence and taking depositions, including from Paxton.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit reached a tentative settlement in February, and Phelan was among the lawmakers to quickly raise questions about the use of taxpayer dollars for the payment. Under the Texas Whistleblower Act, claims must be brought against the state, not an individual officeholder.

Paxton and his staff testified before the House Appropriations Committee in February, formally asking for the settlement money.

About three weeks later, the House General Investigating Committee quietly opened “Matter A” and continued the investigation through this month.

The committee confirmed the investigation Tuesday, after Paxton called for Phelan to resign, accusing him of being intoxicated on the House floor, in what many saw as a move to deflect attention from the investigation of the attorney general.

Then the committee held an explosive hearing Wednesday in which it revealed its allegations against Paxton – both old and new. The new allegations include that he has homestead exemptions on more than one property in violation of state law – an accusation Paxton’s head of litigation, Chris Hilton, called untrue during a news conference Friday.

“Ken Paxton is a master of delaying and ducking accountability,” said Tom Nesbitt, who represents one of the whistleblowers. “He avoided depositions and discovery in our case for two and a half years. The legislative investigators thoroughly proved that the whistleblowers’ allegations are true.”

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/st ... 263101007/

[ti-amie]

Here are the articles of impeachment against Paxton

https://drive.google.com/viewerng/viewe ... vpanes%3D0

[ti-amie]

Ranking Member Raskin’s Statement Following Call with FBI Director Chris Wray
May 31, 2023 Press Release
Washington, D.C. (May 31, 2023)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, issued a statement following his call with FBI Director Christopher Wray, which was scheduled after Chairman Comer refused to allow the Ranking Member to participate in the Committee’s call with Director Wray. The Ranking Member scheduled a separate call so that Director Wray could brief Committee Democrats on the information the FBI would make available in response to the Committee’s subpoena.



“Director Wray informed me that the FBI has agreed to accommodate the Committee’s request by making the document sought by Chairman Comer available for in person review. The FBI will also provide context on the Trump Justice Department’s steps to follow up on the unsubstantiated, second-hand claims contained in this tip. Although Chairman Comer has publicly claimed the FBI’s follow-up is central to his inquiry, he failed to include it in his request, which is mysterious to me. In any case, the FBI has made clear in conversations with the Committee leading up to today’s call, it continues to work in good faith to accommodate Committee Republicans’ request in a manner that will not jeopardize its law enforcement mission, its confidential human source program, or the safety of its informants.



“Despite these extraordinary accommodations—and the fact that Republicans have claimed to have access to the very information subpoenaed—Chairman Comer has continued to insist he will hold the FBI Director in contempt. It is increasingly clear that Committee Republicans have always planned to hold Director Wray in contempt of Congress to distract from the obvious fact that they do not have evidence to support their unfounded accusations against President Biden. This latest political maneuver underscores Chairman Comer’s determination to use the Committee to help former President Trump’s reelection efforts and pander to extreme MAGA Republicans,” said Ranking Member Raskin.



###

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/ne ... chris-wray

[ti-amie]

[ti-amie]

Also Tim Scott, Chris Christie, and now Cornel West.

[ti-amie]

I wonder why they didn't schedule these "town halls" opposite the Stanley Cup Finals? What audience are they aiming this programming to?

[ponchi101]

You mean: what demographics DOES NOT watch the NBA finals? Uhm...

[Owendonovan]

Also Tim Scott, Chris Christie, and now Cornel West.

That leather vest looks so natural on Mike. So far, all the GOP candidates are abhorrent.

[ti-amie]

Of course no one saw this coming... /s

House in stalemate after hard-right Republicans defy McCarthy, block legislation
By Amy B Wang, Marianna Sotomayor and Leigh Ann Caldwell
Updated June 7, 2023 at 3:10 p.m. EDT|Published June 7, 2023 at 12:59 p.m. EDT

The House remained in a stalemate Wednesday, recessing minutes after the session began, as hard-right Republicans defied GOP leadership and blocked legislation.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) met Wednesday afternoon with several members of the House Freedom Caucus to negotiate on their demands after 11 hard-right lawmakers — still angry over McCarthy’s handling of the debt ceiling bill — voted with Democrats against passing a rule for consideration of several bills this week. A resolution has yet to be struck, though ongoing negotiations now involve possibly scheduling votes on key bills the Freedom Caucus prioritizes.

McCarthy admitted Wednesday he had been “blindsided” by Tuesday’s events, which was the first rule vote to fail since November 2002, but insisted that the Republican caucus would emerge stronger.

“We’re talking through it. I think we’ll get ... through it,” McCarthy said, trying to project the same optimism he exhibited in January when it took 15 rounds of voting and multiple concessions for him to win the speakership. Without the passage of the rule vote, the House cannot move forward on legislation.

“We have a very small majority, so four or five people can create a problem for the whole [caucus]," McCarthy added. “You got to be sure you come together as a family, otherwise we won’t be successful for the American people. So what it really takes is you take a step back [and ask], ‘Who are you here for? Are you here for yourself or are you here for the American public?’”

Throughout Wednesday morning, the group of disruptors met and spoke with McCarthy and his team. Leadership is still unclear what exactly the group of 11 Republicans want, and different members want different things, making it more difficult to address their concerns, according to two people close to leadership who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Meanwhile, other Republicans waiting to be told of what happens next were growing frustrated.

“I don’t blame the Freedom Caucus, as many of them rightfully oppose this defeatist behavior,” one moderate GOP lawmaker said. “This group is the Dysfunction Caucus.”

The surprise rebuke underscored the anger that several members of the House Freedom Caucus and other hard-right conservatives still harbored toward Republican leadership over their willingness to allow Democrats to vote in support of the debt bill and override their concerns before sending it to the Senate, where it also passed in bipartisan fashion. President Biden signed the deal over the weekend, barely skirting a catastrophic default that had been projected for Monday.

McCarthy, Biden and their lieutenants had brokered a deal days before to suspend the debt ceiling until 2025 and cut federal spending, prompting outrage from several hard-right GOP lawmakers who argued that the bill did not cut spending enough — and who accused McCarthy of violating several promises that they say helped them elect him speaker.

On Wednesday, McCarthy continued to defend his debt ceiling deal with Biden, pushing back on assertions from some GOP lawmakers that he had promised to keep federal spending at 2022 levels.

“We never promised we’re going to be all at ’22 levels. I said we would strive to get to the ’22 level or the equivalent amount of cut. We’ve met all that criteria,” McCarthy said. “I think we kind of hit the sweet spot. The difficult part is, when anytime you try to work any type of agreement, you’re not going to get 100 percent of what you want. But think of what we did achieve.”

Given that a significant swath of the far-right bloc of the GOP conference would not support the debt ceiling measure, Republicans needed the help of Democrats to pass a key procedural hurdle, known as the rule, that sets the parameters for debate before final passage. Historically, a rule vote is only passed by the majority party, including those who oppose the final bill. Almost two dozen more Democrats than Republicans also voted to pass the bill to the Senate last Wednesday evening.

In retaliation, the 11 far-right lawmakers voted against the first rule vote this week, preventing GOP leadership’s wish to pass four non-divisive bills that would have returned them to the status quo. It proved the difficulty McCarthy and other leaders now face as they work to make amends with a fractious bloc of the conference that historically bucks leadership.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), one of the lawmakers who voted against the rule vote on Tuesday, said Wednesday that he did so because Republican leadership had “not taken reckless spending” seriously, and again alluded to unspoken promises he said GOP leadership had made.

“There are over a thousand unauthorized government programs that continue to be funded without oversight, Congressional hearings, or a reauthorization vote,” Buck said in a statement. “Promises were made earlier this year regarding spending; I expect those commitments to be kept.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) became the 12th Republican to defect on Tuesday after he changed his vote to “no” once he and other GOP leaders failed to convince the far-right House Freedom Caucus to end their blockade before the vote was called. The move allows the GOP to revisit the vote once full support from the majority emerges again.

Camila DeChalus contributed to this report.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... om-caucus/

[ponchi101]

...

Also Tim Scott, Chris Christie, and now Cornel West.

That leather vest looks so natural on Mike. So far, all the GOP candidates are abhorrent.

Are there any GOP candidates that could be acceptable? Romney (he looks down right sterling next to this field), Chenney (Liz, not her dad), Kasich? Any of these could remotely be a candidate?
Serious question.