[a previous draft of this was filed as a comment] In December, to great publicity, Paxton filed a lawsuit before the Supreme Court claiming that the election had been stolen. It was joined by 17 Attorneys General and 100+ (Republican) Congressmen. In the months following, he has publicly maintained his claim. The filing and his public claims have given support to belief in the “Big Lie.” In his recent [7/15] Response to four Grievances [see end for names] before the Texas Bar, however, facing disbarment, Paxton walks back from his claim. Instead, he stated that he had hoped to develop the evidence during trial. The clear implication is that he does not have that evidence. This is still more proof that the “Big Lie” is indeed a big lie.
His Response provides still more proof that Paxton is a world-class sleazebag. It demonstrates that his claims of a stolen election and of illegal voting procedures were merely posturing to improve his political standing. The top law officer of Texas put our system of democracy in grave danger for his own political benefit.
His sleaziness, in fact, has played a large role in his filing the lawsuit. He’s currently being prosecuted for selling worthless stock without a securities license and without informing the purchasers that he was paid to peddle the stock. One story has it that he sold some shares to his colleagues in the State House. When he then ran for Speaker, he was disappointed to find they didn’t support him. Being ambitious, he next ran for Attorney General, which didn’t require his colleagues’ approval. (He faced a primary opponent and the Republican establishment supported the opponent, but this was the year the Tea Party took over, and Paxton (and Cruz in the Senate) defeated more mainstream Republicans.) (Another article said he’d agreed to run for Speaker later. When he breached his agreement, he’d ended his chances of advancement in the House.)
Troubles resulting from his sleaziness may have motivated filing the lawsuit. Last fall, his hand-selected top aides charged him with interfering with a criminal investigation into a local businessman because the businessman had given Paxton’s mistress a job. Several articles say that one of Paxton’s motives for filing the lawsuit may have been to obtain a pardon from the beneficiary of the lawsuit, the former guy. In addition, Paxton is willing to step over lines that his colleagues aren’t. Paxton filed the lawsuit and has repeatedly claimed that the election was stolen. In contrast, Cruz, described by a fellow Republican as “Lucifer in human flesh” was only willing to say that his constituents had concerns about the election, when he voted against certifying it. Similarly, the Congressmen and AGs only signed onto a small part of the lawsuit. They weren’t willing to sign onto the whole thing. In particular, they didn’t sign onto his factual claims, his argument on the legal doctrine of standing --- that Texas should be able to dictate to four other sovereign states how they conduct their elections, or timeliness – that a lawsuit was timely when filed a month after the election and a week before state certification of electors was no longer subject to challenge.
Gov. Abbott has called a special session to take away voting rights and allow the state legislature to overturn elections. He should instead call a special session to impeach this danger to democracy.
Here’s links to two articles for more information:
A response to Paxton’s response
http://www.offthekuff.com/wp/?p=101477
Facing disbarment, Texas AG Ken Paxton backs away from Trump's fraud claims | Salon.com
- The four people whose Grievances Paxton responded to:
- Kevin Moran, retired journalist, President of the Galveston Island Democrats
- David Chew – former Senior Chief Justice Chew, El Paso
- Brynne VanHettinga, Dr. VanHettinga is an inactive member of the Texas Bar and also has a PhD.
- I’m a retired patent lawyer.
A high-powered lawyers group filed yet another Grievance shortly before Paxton’s reply to ours. https://ldad.org/letters-briefs/ag-paxton-ethics-complaint