Transcripts For CSPAN Opening 20240703

All rise. The court of impeachment of the texas senate is now in session. The honorable Lieutenant Governor and president of the senate, dan patrick, now presiding. May be seated. I am going to take your suggestion into consideration on exhibits, if time is spent from your side. Thank you very much. At this time, Opening Statement by the managers. Mr. Presiding officer. One housekeeping matter before that. Yes . The attorney general seeks a ruling from this court that to the extent privileges, attorneyclient privilege, executive privilege, etc. , may apply, those are held by the attorney general. Now, were not asking the court it rule in any particular statement or any particular document as privilege at this time but for purposes of the managers Opening Statement, Going Forward in this case, we ask that this court rule that those privileges, which all attach during the time at which the attorney genoas the elected serving duly attorney general attached to him, conversations he had with other parties, where he was the client seeking legal advice from subordinates and essentially directing official functions and to the extent those are implicated, we seek a ruling that those privileges, that they belong to the attorney general. Do you have a response . Yes. I do want to recognize and reflect in light of the courts earlier analogy to a criminal case, i want the record to reflect that the attorney general is not here. Maybe hes coming at some time today but i think if were going to it talk about this being a criminal case, that the defendant ought to be ordered to appear throughout this. Just as everyone else. Thats number one. But number two is, were prepared to address this issue. There is a motion to, i think, one of the third parties had a motion on the attorneyclient issue that they were trying to raise. I would have thought we would have dealt with this before now, just as we were getting ready to do Opening Statements. They knew they had this issue all along. If the court wants to hear argument on it now, mr. Gardner was always prepare to do it on our side. Wed be prepared to engage in the argument. But its the discretion of the court to proceed. Under the rule, the attorney general paxton was required to be here. Addressing that first point. Throughout the trial. Im still thinking of your motion. I want to clarify under resolution 36, he was required to be here today but not all day. So let me clarify that. Yes. [indiscernible] as per the rule, he was here at 9 00, as required. I didnt see anything else in the rule that required him to be here any other time. Youre right. Correct. Please come to the bench. Please approach. We have asked for the record, the paxton team, counselors to come forward. I will address. And members, let me just not remind you but when were meeting at the bench, the juries may not come up jurors may not come up because of the conversation. Ill rule on your motion as they come up. And members of the jury, i want to remind you that statements made in the Opening Statement is not evidence and its an outline of what theyre going to present. With that, mr. Burr. Yes. Having a hard time hearing. Those mics are lowered. I dont think they were intended for them to be standing at the table talking. With that, if you could make sure that for those of us who have a hard time hearing in this chamber, that they try to be closer to the microphones. Yes, senator. The requirement was to be sitting at the mics at the table, not standing. So when you come to the podium you can stand. But be sure you get into the mic because the echoes in here are very difficult. Thank you. You have 60 minutes. Mr. President , senators, today is an important day. On this day in 1836, sam houston, whose bible you used for your oath today, was elected president of the republic of texas. Today is also an important day because we begin this impeachment trial. While impeachment is rare, the drafters of our state constitution recognized that there are times when this extraordinary remedy is needed to protect the state and its citizens from a Public Office holder who has abused the power of his office by putting selfinterest above that of the people of texas. The drafters concluded that this great deliberative body, the texas senate, is best positioned to determine when this remedy is appropriate. Mr. Murr earlier this year, mre legislature seeking 3. 3 million in taxpayer money to settle a whistleblower lawsuit. Mr. Paxton would not answer any questions about the underlying claims. He has successfully blocked any discovery in the case for almost two years. And he refused to justify the settlement. The house investigated the serious allegations raised by the whistleblowers. The house uncovered egregious misconduct and abuse of office by the attorney general of the state of texas and voted overwhelmingly to prefer articles of impeachment to the senate. This is why we are here. The allegations in the articles reveal that the states top lawyer engaged in conduct designed to advance the economic interests and legal positions of a friend and donor to the detriment of innocent texans. Mr. Paxton turned the keys of the office of attorney general over to nate paul so that mr. Paul could use the awesome power of the Peoples Law Firm to punish and harass perceived enemies. I was raised in rural texas. Where a persons honor is more important than money, where integrity matters. And by a family deeply affected by political corruption. This is precisely the type of grave official wrong that our Texas Supreme Court has said warrants impeachment. My grandfather, who was privileged to serve the state of texas for many years, had a favorite quote from abraham lincoln. Nearly all man can stand adversity. But if you really want to test a mans character, give him power. Mr. Paxton has been entrusted with great power. Unfortunately rather than rise to the occasion, hes revealed his true character. And as the overwhelming evidence will show, hes not fit to be the attorney general for the state of texas. Mr. Paxton argues that the senate should not exercise its constitutional duty to decide whether its conduct merits impeachment. Because voters were aware of the allegations and still reelected him. He claims that the senate should abide by the alleged will of the voters. However, this ignores the intent of our framers of the constitution. Impeachment was included in the constitution after the Founding Fathers debated and rejected the idea that elections could singularly protect the public against abusive office holders. In other words, drafters agreed that impeachment was and is necessary to protect against abusive officials because it was simply too easy for them to use the powers of their office to conceal the truth until after the next election. The concept of the forgiveness doctrine is not in our constitution and does not apply here. The courts have made that very clear. And even if it did, the doctrine presumes that voters know all the facts. The voters did not and do not know the whole truth. Mr. Paxton went to great length to hide his misconduct from the public. The evidence will show that he used massive resources of his office to prepare and issue a sham report that allegedly exonerated him. The evidence will show that this report contains false and misleading information about the allegations against him and about the whistleblowers themselves. And he also lied about the independent nature of this investigation. Documents will show that he played a key role in drafting that report. The constitution says the senate has the power and the duty to decide this case and to protect the people of texas from someone who has violated his oath and has shown he does not respect the law. The witnesses and the evidence will show you that mr. Paxtons conduct merits the exercise of that power. And the witnesses and the evidence will show and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he should be removed from office and prevented from ever holding a position of trust in the state of texas again. Mr. Paxton argues that the articles do not allege impefpable county impeachable conduct because they do not allege that he committed a crime. We do allege that he committed crimes. We have detailed that mr. Paxton received favors, including Home Renovations that helped in concealing and continuing an extra marital affair, in exchange for the office of attorney general punishing nate pauls enemies. However, we dont have to show some type of quid pro quo to establish that his conduct should result in impeachment. As the Texas Supreme Court made clear regarding the impeachment of governor ferguson 106 years ago, wrongs justifying impeachment dont have to be crimes. Wrongs justifying impeachment are broader than that. Because they have the purpose of protecting the state, not punishing the offender. Mr. Paxton should be removed from office because he failed to protect the state and instead used the power of his elected office for his own benefit. And this was wrong. The oath of office that we all took to protect the citizens of state and to uphold the laws of this state and this constitution mean something. It isnt just words on paper. Literally an oath to god. And mr. Paxton had an obligation not to abuse his office for his own benefit. He betrayed his constituents and the sacred public trust thats been given him. And in texas we require more from our Public Officials than to merely avoid being a criminal. The witnesses you will hear from are remarkable people. Until they refused to follow mr, they were his most trusted, handpicked advisors and they believed in his conservative mission for the office of the attorney general. The problem isnt their commitment to conservative governance changed. It is, at the end of the day, mr. Paxton wasnt the man they thought he was. And he wasnt the man he publicly proclaimed to be. His trusted advisors are not rhinos or part of some deep state storyline. They are movement conservatives, guided by their faith. These witnesses will explain step by step how they discovered that mr. Paxton grew increasingly intent and passionate about helping his partner, nate paul, escape civil and criminal legal troubles that he was facing. They will describe in chilling detail when they connected the dots of mr. Paxtons slow creep of corruption. The senior staff were outraged when they discovered that mr. Paxton had directed a young, inexperienced outside attorney to obtain grand jury subpoenas to harass and interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation. Subpoenas that had been improperly issued to d. P. S. Officers, a federal judge, attorneys involved in a civil lawsuit against nate paul. And even court staff. And the subpoenas sought intensely personal information, including cell phones and email records. Now, im not going to detail in this opening all the allegations against mr. Paxton. Youre aware of many of them. You sit as a unique jury. Having known mr. Paxton and familiar with some of the facts. But even a quick summary of some of the evidence that youre going to hear is shocking. One of mr. Paxtons many acts of deceit involves a member of this chamber, at a time when the policy of the state was, texas is open for business during covid. Mr. Paxton directed his staff to issue a legal opinion advising that statewide foreclosure sales not move forward. Mr. Paxton was adamant that the opinion, which came to be known as the midnight opinion, be issued before the end of the weekend, just in time for nate paul to use it to avoid a foreclosure sale the following tuesday. This conduct benefited nate paul and it harmed businesses and people impacted by foreclosure. Mr. Paxton also used the power of this office to harm a charity, solely to benefit nate paul. The office of the attorney general is charged with the responsibility of intervening in lawsuits when its necessary to assist a charitable organization. As youll hear, the first and only charitable case mr. Paxton took a personal interest in was the nitty foundations lawsuit against nate pauls entities as an investor. The evidence will show that mr. Paxton directed his office to intervene in the lawsuit, to stay the case, and allow the a. G. s office the opportunity to pressure this charity to accept a lowball settlement offer. This would have saved tphaeuts paul millions of dollars. Nate paul wanted materials on raids on his home and businesses. In an attempt to learn how the police knew info, mr. Paul wanted the full police file, even though no police file may be disclosed due to the wellestablished Law Enforcement exception. Mr. Paxton pressured his deputies to authorize the release of this information. Had he succeeded, mr. Paxton would have created precedent allowing any person under criminal investigation, whether for a violent felony or a sex offense, to obtain confidential information about the investigations of their conduct. Mr. Paxton simply did not care that his request to release information to nate paul would have put police and victims across the state at risk. Unfortunately the house investigation revealed that mr. Paxtons relationship with mr. Paul was far more extensive than even his closest advisors knew. Over the course of three months, mr. Paxton personally met with nate paul more than 20 times. Many times mr. Paxton would ditch his security detail and nate pauline set up a secret uber account that allowed mr. Paxton to secretly visit nate paul and others. To conceal his efforts, mr. Paxton communicated in off the book ways, using burner phones, encrypted messaging apps, and secret email addresses. Mr. Paxtons brazen abuse of the criminal Justice Division at the office of attorney general is finally what caused eight of his senior staff to report him to the police. The question that haunts them and should frighten all of us is what would have happened if they had not reported him . How far would mr. Paxton have gone in using the power of the Attorney Generals Office to harass and punish his and nate pauls perceived enemies and hurt innocent texans . Mr. Paxton tries to defend his actions by isolating each event and claiming that standing alone they cant support impeachment. You cannot and should not view each act in a vacuum. The evidence will show that theyre all connected. Theyre all connected by mr. Paxton and his desire to deliver for his partner, nate paul. Mr. Paxton will also argue that the acts represent differences of opinion on policy. Or efforts to help a constituent. But the witnesses will explain to you that mr. Paxtons actions have nothing to do with implementing conservative policy. And in fact his efforts violated those very principles. Mr. Paxtons senior advisors were fully aware of the dire consequences of reporting him to Law Enforcement. They knew retribution would be swift and vicious. The choice they made to report him to the police was one of the hardest of their lives. But they will tell you that there really wasnt a choice at all. Sam houston, who on this day in 1836 was elected president of a new and free republic, reminded t pbgsans texans, do right and risk the consequences. Do right and risk the consequences. Doing the right thing is sometimes not easy. Sometimes we must do the right thing in the face of enormous pressure to remain silent. The witnesses felt this pressure. The house felt this pressure. And the senate is feeling this pressure. Its unfair and its wrong but despite the forces that seek to intimidate the senate, you have taken the first steps toward the truth by giving the people who did the right thing a chance to testify. Despite the attacks that they know will continue to come, the witnesses will do the right thing once more and they will take this witness stand and they will provide the clarity that the senate needs and that the public deserves to find out what was really happening behind closed doors. As chair, i resolutely give this statement with the support of and on behalf of the board of managers. And on behalf of the texas house. You all provided us with an hour to make an Opening Statement. But we prefer to yield back the rest of that time to the most important folks that will show up in this room. The witnesses. The same witnesses that mr. Paxton has been so desperate to discredit and intimidate and to silence. We are honored to be able to give them their day in this honored and rare court, for we simply seek justice on behalf of the people of texas. Thank you, mr. President. Does the defense wish to make an Opening Statement . We do, your honor. I think we have 15 minutes to break. Is that the rule . Youre up right now. Play it please the court. I stand in this hallowed chamber, in this historic proceeding, on behalf of the duly elected attorney general of the state of texas. The prosecution and the press, and im sure here, will tell a whopping story. Its a tale full of fury. It signifies nothing. And you may wonder why i say that. Because when we are done, i believe that no matter your party affiliation, and no matter where you stand now, you will conclude what i have concluded. That there is nothing to this. Ken paxton gave nothing of significance to nate paul. Nate paul received nothing of significance from ken paxton. This whole case is a whole lot of nothing. I make my living trying cases to texas juries. Cases are supposed to be decided only upon the evidence. But i do wonder, are we really going to get a fair trial here . You have already decided based on what is politically expedient or whats best for you personally . Or is it even possible to get a fair hearing . Especially after this case has been tried in the press, ken paxton has been convicted in the press based on ignorance, innuendo and outright lies. So the question is, will you decide based only on the evidence . Because thats your oath. Thats what you swore to do. No matter the consequences. And i urge you to do your duty and do it without fear. They say this is the impeachment of a lifetime. But is it . Because depending on what you do here, maybe it will become commonplace. What happens here will have consequences no matter how it turns out. Lets be clear. If this misguided effort is successful, which i feel confident it will not be, the precedent it would set would be perilous for any elected official in the state of texas. Whats being attempted here hasnt happened in our state in 100 years. And unlike other efforts of the past like this one, this scheme was rushed, it was secretive, it was poorly planned ands with wholly unsupported by evidence. Indeed, just like despite the social media ferenczy, the misinformed commentators, the reporters with an agenda, at the end of this, youll come to know what i know, that despite all of us being told that the evidence in this matter is 10 times worse than the public knows, it is instead 100 times less. There is nothing here to support impeachment. Nothing. Now, theres been a gag order in this case. This gag order put our team at a distinct disadvantage. That prevented us from rebutting the false narrative created by a frenzied press. The gag order of course didnt stop those media members with agendas or those Media Outlets aligned with the house managers. And they were calling for ken paxtons head. Weve heard in the media about burner phones. There are no burner phones. But we couldnt respond. Weve heard about secret email addresses. If its so secret that every person on ken paxtons staff used the same type of email address because they were traveling to china, theres no secret email address. But we couldnt respond. Weve heard about uber rides for ken paxton in vegas, chicago, or to even night clubs. Those are manufactured lies. But we couldnt respond. Weve even heard from the press about cakes from h. E. B. , stolen pens, pilfered sport coats. Outright foolishness. But we couldnt respond. We heard about house renovations supposedly paid for by the manipulating boogieman, nate paul. That never happened. Ken paxton and Angela Paxton paid for their house renovations. And im going to show that absolutely 100 . They know it but yet they still stood up here and repeated that lie. Lets talk a little bit about some background. 2015, ken paxton ran against the anointed candidate for attorney general, branch. He represented the political elites. He was the established candidate. Ken paxton beat him soundly. Almost immediately after that win, ken paxton was on the receiving end of a clearly political indictment at the hands of rivals within his own party. That saga continues to this day with a pair of unelected special prosecutors nudging it forward year after year with the expectation and hope that someday they will get paid. Nevertheless, despite being indicted and despite a very public lawsuit that makes the exact same allegations that are being made here, ken paxton easily won his last primary. As he has in every election. In fact, ken paxton stumped the establishment candidate who this last time happened to be a bush. And it wasnt even close. Ken paxton won 68 to 32 in the primary. Now, think about that. General paxton run toesed the trounced the establishment candidate, a member of the bush dynasty, and beat him badly. As an aside, did you realize that the day before the vote for this impeachment was had, that that same bush applied to renew his law license . Lets put this proceeding in context. Almost 30 Million People live in the state of texas. Texans chose at voting booth who they wanted to be their attorney general. Despite the same baseless allegations that are being made here. But because of what this house has done, only 30 people out of almost 30 million will decide whether ken paxton is allowed to serve in the office he was voted into. Thats not how its supposed to work. Thats not democratic. What could be less democratic than 30 people deciding who serves as the attorney general of texas instead of the 4. 2 Million People who voted to put him there . Every election season we hear, your vote is your voice. Its important to go vote, to be a good member of society. We hear about the sanctity of the right to vote. We hear that people fought and died for the right to vote. We hear every vote should count. Yet to get here, texas house took away the votes of over four million texans who voted for ken paxton. And they did it in only a fourhour hearing. There is a right way for texas voters to remove someone from office. Its called vote against them. Who the people want, who the people voted for should matter. Let me give you some names. George p. Bush, eva guzman, louie gohmert, dan branch, barrett smitherman, justin nelson. Those are just some of the people that texans decided they did not want to be their attorney general. The people chose general paxton. Do their votes matter . People are watching. The will of those texans should not be subverted. And people of texas, let me say this. I am very happy that these proceedings are being livestreamed. I think it is good that texas voters can hear every bit of evidence or the complete lack of evidence that supports this from both sides. Im sure that the more than 4. It Million People 4. 2 Million People who voted for ken paxton will want to hear why, will want to hear why 30 people are deciding his fate. And through all of this, we must not forget, ken paxton for the last eight years has operated the most aggressive, effective litigation apparatus of any Attorney Generals Office in the country. According to the pundits, ken paxton was never supposed to be serving in statewide office. Ken backston is very much paxton is very much serving. Look at his record. Under his leadership, the a. G. s office has won major cases for texas on immigration, the lives of unborn, religious freedom and the continuous overreach by the federal government on our everyday lives. Under his direction, the a. G. s office has sued the obama and biden administrations more than any other a. G. Office in the country. Even cnn has called texas a legal grave yard for bidens policies. And under his watch, and with his personal involvement, the Attorney Generals Office has recovered billions of dollars for texas taxpayers. Including 3 billion against big pharma as a result of the opioid crisis. It has been said but i think its worth repeating, ken paxton is the best attorney general in the country, period. All of this, of course, begs the most pressing question. If ken paxton is so good at his job, and routinely defeats his political opponents at the ballot box, then what the devil are we doing here . We know this entire process took less than two months, with fewer than 15 witnesses, none of which were ever put under oath. Shouldnt this investigation have done right and taken a whole lot longer . After all, this historic procedure took an entire year the last time it was used. With sworn testimony taken by the committee in open hearings, giving the respondent an opportunity to be heard, to confront his accusers. So why was it so short this time . Why did it happen when it did . What was the rush . Because if theyd taken their time, and done it right, we wouldnt be here. We wouldnt hear about burner phones or house renovations or secret uber rides. We wouldnt hear any of that. Because they would have delved into it and saw that it was all false. So why . Ill tell you why. On may 19, 2023, speaker feelen was so drunk while running the house business, he could barely even hold the gavel. And that drunkenness was on video and was on the internet for the entire world to see. Im sure youve seen the video as well. Four days later, on may 23, ken paxton issued a statement and called for dave feelen to resign. In response, the committee hurriedly met the very next day, conducted a fourhour hearing, and recommended impeachment the day after that. Because of the rush, the house didnt bother to vet this foolishness. And now theyve put it right in your lap. For you to do the work that they failed to do. This impeachment was the perfect marriage of a group of representatives fueled by a powerful lobbyist and led by a drunken speaker. Seeking political vengeance. It was also a result of a group of uninformed civil litigants and their attorneys who were motivated by money. The houses General Investigating Committee proceeded in a rushed and secret, so secret in fact that the only people who could have testified and brought actual evidence and exonerated ken paxton were not even called. I hope you will look at the evidence. I hope youll really look at the evidence. I have faith in this body that you will actually see the evidence and make an informed decision. I want to focus just on a few of the impeachment articles. Theres so many of them, i wouldnt have time to go through every one. But i think one that you might be interested in is article 10. Thats the article where the house managers have argued that ken paxtons house renovations were paid for by nate paul. And youve heard that lie repeated over and over and over again in the press and its false. The house managers adopted this lie about a nonexistent bribe and repeated it with no evidence, nothing. The news media endlessly amplified this lie without ever documenting it. And then its been repeated over and over and even repeated by my colleagues today. Hear this, press corps. Kin paxton and ken paxton and Angela Paxton paid for their house renovations. Period. Youll see in this case a steam team estimate, the paxtons house had some water damage, steam team came out to correct the water damage, were going to show you those documents. Where usaa claim was made to pay for that. You will see that the paxtons had fits with the insurance company, just like all of us had at one time or another, trying to get that claim paid. Youll see that Angela Paxton specifically was involved in talking through some of the repairs they were going to do as part of that process. They were going to do some upgrades. And youll see mindnumbing pictures of angela and ken paxton at home depot, at lowes, pricing stoves, pricing countertops, trying to get the best buy and ultimately deciding that despite you what hear about granite, with all due respect to senator paxton, their countertops are just old, rattie tile ratty tile. And they didnt get a new stove. And they didnt get to change out their cabinets. But thats not what youve heard in the press. Im going to show you the usaa docs. Im going to show you, september 16, 2020, usaa made its final determination of what theyd pay. They paid for steam clean and the second contractor was cooper tino builders and youve heard, oh, thats a in the press conference, he showed coopertino builders invoice. That company didnt exist. Well, guess what, it did. It absolutely did. Im going to show you the documents kwraourpbd going to see that this article is false just like every other one. Youre going to see the usaa determination. Youre going to see that usaa knew they had another contractor. Youre going to see a text from the trustee back and forth between ken paxton where ken paxton says, i have this invoice, i have to pay it. Yue going to youre going see all of that and youre going to see the wire come from the paxtons bank account and go to coopertino Builders Bank account. Youre going to see the front side of the transaction and the backside of the transaction and youre going to conclude like everybody has to conclude that these folks were pinching pennies, they were trying to update and renovate their house and there were a lot of things they just couldnt afford. Im going to show you pictures ad nauseum of their house. And you will conclude what ive concluded. The paxtons have been defamed over and over in the press and by the house. Now, the second socalled bribe, nate paul, the boogieman nate paul, gave ken paxton 25,000. Oh, goodness gracious. You know when he gave that money . October, 2018. Years before any of these allegations ever existed. Years before any of the acts allegedly that occurred ever occurred. Think about their theory. Their theory is, nate paul in october of 2018 swaos ma nip live was so manipulative and so smart, he thought maybe years in the future he may be needing something from ken paxton. Heres the problem with that. He gave money to people in this very chamber as well. In fact, he wasnt the only recipient of a Campaign Donation. But lets focus on Campaign Donations. Incidentally in 2018, ken paxton raised millions upon millions of dollars, a 25,000 donation, although it sounds like a lot of money, ken paxton is a great fundraiser. He raises a lot of money and that donation aint even a blip on the radar screen. But lets think about that. Campaign donations cant be bribes, they are not bribes. Do any of us believe a Campaign Donation in here is a bribe . You know how often i get calls for Campaign Donations . A lot. Are those bribes . No. If Campaign Donations were bribes, everybody in this town would be impeached. Just line up, once we finish ken paxton, well start impeaching everybody else. I want to shift our focus in the time i have and address what could be the elephant in the room. Theres been some shraeurbs allegations made about ken paxton. The argument is that nate paul provided a job for a woman named laura olson. It doesnt hold any water. Laura olson applied for a job, laura olson got a job, youre going to he soot Employment Contract youre going to see the Employment Contracts, youre going to see what her salary was, youre going to see her pay stubbs, youre going to hear about the work she did and youre also going to hear that she continues to do that work today. Today. That was not a bribe. That was a job sought out and received and shes doing real work today. Youll see the pay stubbs and youll see the employment applications. Now, youve heard so much my colleague talked about how ken paxton turned over the keys to the a. G. s office to nate paul. Remember hearing that . Totally false. One of the things youre going to see in this case is that ken paxton got nothing from nate paul and nate paul got nothing from ken paxton. Lets look at what nate paul got from the a. G. s office. Nate paul believed that the feds had targeted him. He believed that the feds had violated his civil rights. He believed that an affidavit, a warrant for the search of his home and businesses had been altered. He believed it. Still believes it today. He didnt know where to go. He went to ken paxton. Ken paxton sent him to the Travis County District Attorneys Office. He was then turned around and referred back because of conflicts. There were conflicts. But what did nate paul great that . Get from that . No bankrupts were averted, no foreclosures were stopped, no agents were indicted, no agents had to respond to any subpoena. Nothing. Nate paul got nothing. If that was attempted bribery, that was the least effective one in the history of the United States. Youre going to see nate paul got nothing. In fact, you will also see email after email after email of nate paul and his lawyers sending letters to the a. G. s office madder than a hornets nest. Youre not doing your job, youre not doing your job. Youre not doing what youre supposed to do. Were going to sue the a. G. s office. Does that sound like somebody who has the key to the a. G. s office . It sounds like somebody who might be a little entitled and thinks that Public Officials should jump when he says jump. Maybe jump and hope he jumps high enough. But one thing is clear. Nate paul got nothing and he was very unhappy about it. He did not think the a. G. s office was doing its job and he sent email after email, letter after letter, culminating in a letter where he threatened a lawsuit against the a. G. s office. You never saw those emails, did you . You never saw those letters, did you . You never even heard about them. The press knows about them. They didnt report that, did they . This idea that the a. G. s office harmed the foundation. Do you know their history . Do you know who the first a. G. Was that had issue with the foundation . Greg abbott. Greg abbott. Greg abbott sued the foundation. They had one person who was indicted, they had another person who allegedly beat their wife and child. In this instance, youll see why the a. G. s office decided to intervene. Theres a memo, a memo that lays out the tortured history of the foundation and the Decision Making mate ricks and matrix and every Single Person in the chain of command signed off, including the socalled whistleblowers to intervene in the foundation case. Not to protect charity. This is the misconception. The a. G. s office is not there to protect charities as has been alleged. The a. G. s office is there to protect the publics interest in charity. In other words, those are donated funds and the charity better take care of its ps and qs and the foundation was not. And nate paul was so mad that the a. G. s office wasnt doing more, the intervention lasted three months and the a. G. s Office Dropped the case. Once they saw what was going on. And remember this. Youll see the mentalo where not only did memo where plot only did the entire chain of demand decide to intervene in the mitte foundation, but also decided to open an investigation of the mitte foundation. You have heard that in the press . This is what were up against. We are trying a case not here in front of you, honorable members, were trying a case but were getting prosecuted in the press. And so here we are, baseless allegations thrown at us, shotgun approach, throw it against the wall, see what will stick and make them respond. Thats what this is. Thats what this is and thats what it has been. Theres a reason my colleague did not go through any facts to support this. Because there are no facts to support this. And lets also talk briefly about this socalled midnight opinion. Again, utter foolishness. Did you know on the very day that the informal guidance was issued, they issued another one the very same time frame, like the very same day. You want to know how many foreclosures were stopped by the informal guidance . Zero. They didnt report that either, did they . And you didnt hear that either, did you . Many of these articles, i would respectfully suggest, if you look at whats alleged and you look at the evidence, youll dismiss it out of hand. This is a good one. They claim that this was an a. G. s opinion. This socalled midnight opinion. On the very face of the document it says, this is informal guidance. Its not a 402 legal opinion. That should have been the reason that should have been dismissed. But we will show that to you. We will prove that to you and that article should be disposed of in short work. Now, finally, let me talk about these one of the fact that i find to be the most egregious with regard to these exemployees is that they made assumptions about their boss. They did not raise the functions with their boss. Many of the issues in this case, most of those socalled whistleblowers participated in and signed off on. Do you know what the genesis of this is . I talked about the referral from the District Attorneys Office to the ags office. They were unaware that the District Attorneys Office had done a second referral. They did not go through the ags office, it went to this young man. When they saw that brandon had gotten subpoenaed, their heads almost exploded. Rather than asking the questions , calling the das office in finding out what was going on, they assumed this young lawyer who is being paid 300 an hour, because that was the rate and why you got somebody like him, they assumed he was doing something untoward and they never asked why would you be subpoenaed in a financial to duchenne . Because it was the second referral from the das office. A second referral. We know there was big rigging in office. That is what the da referred to the ags office to investigate. They assumed the worst and instead of asking their boss, they sent a letter to the fbi saying that brandon had appeared the subpoenas had appeared by the das office. They sent that letter to the fbi. They came and met with some of the governors staff, they came and met with some of you even. Instead of meeting with their boss that they claimed they were loyal to. What is most egregious, they sent letters and took ken paxtons name off the letterhead. These people were retaliating against him. He was trying to hide something. Let me ask, if your chief of staff decided he or she disagreed with your actions and decided when you are out in the office trying to put together the case with a bunch of other ags to recover money for the state of texas while you are gone, they get together, send everybody home and eight of them meet and take ken paxtons name off the letterhead and start sending correspondence without his name . Imagine if your chief of staff did that. You would fire them on the spot. If you are a subordinate and you disagree with your boss in their course of action, you raise it with her or him and if there is still a disagreement you resign. That is how it works. What you dont do is try to hijack the office, have a coup or the other things they did. Sabotage grants. They tried to sabotage the grants that the ags office would receive. Millions of dollars of grants they tried to sabotage. You will hear a much different story when you hear the evidence. A much different story. There is a young man named drew who has been all over the news. My colleague made it clear, we all know that you guys read. You Pay Attention to what is going on, part of his job. There is a young man. He was interviewed by the house investigators. I want you to watch and listen to that interview. They asked him, did you ever deliver anything . Know. Never happened. They came back five minutes later, when you deliver things, how many did you deliver . This is how they did this young man who feels he is bold between a rock and a hard place. He still says that angela and ken paxton are like family to him. They squeezed him. He is the one you may recall that said angela had expressed she wanted Granite Countertops and ken paxton was there with me and the contractor said let me check with nate. We heard about 20,000 credit countertops. I dont know where those are. What you will see instead is i have the samples when they went to home depot they had nothing to do with it and drew noticed that is true as well. We look forward to putting on this case and we hope you will listen to all of the evidence. We hope you will make a decision not based on local expediency political expediency but on the evidence. The burden of proof is not we throw out allegations and using that sounds sexy and you say that sounds sexy, im voting for impeachment. They have to prove their case by the numbers, beyond a reasonable doubt. On that point im going to turn it over to my colleagues for the time remaining. Dan has some points he would like to make. Im sorry for the format. But afternoon. Stay at the mic. I will do my best. Good afternoon. Getting off to a great start. My name is dan. Anthony and i are two of the lawyers helping ken paxton. When you get ready for a case like this, there are some things that you know and some things that you dont know. In this case, i knew i was going to know most of the lawyers. I know about my opposing counsel. Ive known them most of my life and they are friends. Im not going to say anything negative about them. It should give you pause, though, because you know if they are friends with me you know there judgment is askew. That being said, i know some of the witnesses, mr. Maxwell. Most of these people are good people. I have no problem with their character. I have a big problem with some of the things that they did. I dont mind sharing with you that my wife is going through a significant medical issue. It was not the best time for me to come here. But she said you go. This is bigger than me and bigger than you, this is bigger than ken paxton. No offense, she is not your biggest fan. But what she meant by that is we are living on the wet hand of democracy right now. Is it up to the voters or politicians to see who stays in office . Your decision is much bigger than ken paxton. Your decision is literally about democracy in this state. I appreciate the comments. I also appreciate the focus on the Bigger Picture and what is happening in here. One thing that is intimidating even though i have been doing this for a long time, 42 years, sometimes i dont recognize that due to the that dude in the mirror when i walk in the mornings. But i wonder to myself, how do i begin a case like this . This is a case of an warmest consequences. Enormous consorts is consequences. Im not automatically the biggest ego of the lawyers involved. I have some competition. I wondered, what am i going to do and say, i need a line, i need the pop. It occurred to me that i dont need that. It occurred to me that i have the truth. It occurred to me that the reason we are here, how did we get here . This is the room where general paxton has been sworn in again and again. This is the room as i understand it where one of his daughters got married. How do we go from that to hear . Here . Because people assumed things that were not true. They assumed he was involved in an illegal ration ship. They assumed his actions were intended to give the record to him. They assume they gave the records to him. They assumed he hired them illegally. All of those things are false. Even einstein said assumptions are made and most assumptions are wrong. A man much lesser perhaps than einstein, but my dad, he said you cant spell assume without making an ass out of you and me. And that is exactly what happened in this case. The reality is, this is not a trial where you can assume anything. This is a trial that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the same amount of proof that is required in a Death Penalty case. I am a visual learner. I like to see things to help me learn. Some going to offer these next slides to you. They are not the law but they are an explanation. A lot of you are lawyers and know these things, but a lot if you have not dealt with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Let me suggest probable cause. If it were a house, it might look like that. Probable cause is the same standard by which the house had to return the articles of impeachment. That is the proof that was required. The evidence, the standard that mr. Busby uses in his cases. Any slight more, that is a preponderance. Clear and convincing evidence, that is the same quantum of proof that is required in the situation where cps wants to take your child away. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, if it was a house, would look like that. It would look like a big house. My point is simple. There is a huge difference between the proof that the house based its decision on and what you are required to base your decision on. Im going to go through the articles quickly. How much time to have . Good. I may give a couple of those back. Well see. Heres the allegation. That he directed employees at his office to act contrary to the law are refusing to render a proper decision relating to a Public Information request and record by dps. A decision that involved another Public Information request that was contrary to law. Number one, he is the attorney general. He can decide how his Office Responds to these inquiries. Fact two. He did not order the release of the records. That has been lost in the wash. There are they suggestions that he ordered release of the records that ostensibly were favorable. No he did not. He did not order the release of those records. Period, full stop. What he did was have his office take no position on whether or not the records should be released. That is a different color of horse. Fact four. Let no records were released to paul and the result of the actions of ken paxton. Let me repeat that. Nate paul got not a single record based upon the action of ken paxton. There were other records that were released to him and his lawyers, but they had nothing to do with any action by ken paxton. Other records were released, but not suggestion of interference, what have you. This use of official information, the allegation, specifically paxton had information held by his office. The purpose of providing that information to the benefit of nate paul. The facts are a little different. Paxton did not illegally access any records. Despite what the allegation is, he never accessed any record illegally. It didnt happen. As the attorney general, paxton had every right legally to access those records. Fact three, there is no evidence that he copied those records. Getting into the weeds with you, but bear with me. He had to file and was responsible for taking a file. He gave those files to mr. Wicker, an aide that works with ken. Wicker says he was never asked to copy the file. I think the evidence is going to be overwhelmingly that ken paxton may be more technologically challenged than me. If anybody was going to copy those files, it would not be ken paxton. Im not sure he even got the copy machine. There are no evidence that he give those documents to mr. Paul. Theres this big kerfuffle and youre going to hear about this fellow by the name of dave mask dave maxwell. He is 66. You call central casting and ask them to send you a texas ranger and they send you maxwell. He said, and i quote, ken paxton gave the file to drew whitaker and he delivered it to nate paxton in an alley in the dark of the night. That is absolutely false. Maybe he was comfortable in his own skin and thought he could stretch out his credibility. It is either a mistake or a lie. Whatever it was, it was wrong. That never happened. Months later, he gives an envelope to nate pole, there is no evidence that it contains these documents. I suggest that these documents would have been several. Not two or three pages. It was written past that. But after the time when the board of managers was claiming that nate paul surreptitiously had these documents, his lawyers are still suing in court to get the documents. That makes no sense. Why would his lawyers still be pursuing civil remedies to get these documents if they already have them and they have gotten them for ken paxton . That is dumber than a bucket of hair. It makes no sense. Maybe they had good intentions and this was their bully for the moment. But they are wrong. This allegation, disregard of the official duty and engagement of panic, it is, while holding the office of attorney general, he has used his official powers paxton engaged brandon, a licensed attorney, to conduct an investigation into a baseless complaint. That is the allegation. They issued more than 30 grand jury subpoenas. Fact number one is paxton has every legal right to hire breaded. Youre going to hear a bunch about one of my favorite terms, the executive action memorandum. Only in State Government can we, with a phrase like executive action and random. What it really is is policy. It is not the law, it is an internal policy within the Attorney Generals Office. It is not the law. This person was not a attorney pro tem. That is what they have alleged and you would think that these lawyers, Investigative Committee , they are full of lawyers. Many of which are ex d. A. An attorney pro tem is appointed when the entire office is is qualified. Brandon was hired as an outside counsel, that they have alleged in the complaint he was an attorney pro tem. He was not. Heres the funny thing. They forgot to tell brandon about this complaint. We have a lot of people hurt by allegations and the investigation and i guess it depends on your view of who whether you like breaded or not. He got absolutely skewered in the press. He was vilified by the press, just take to the woodshed. He was beat like a mule. By the press. All that young man was trying to do was do an investigation that the people who work for ken paxton would not do. And no one bothered to tell him it is a baseless investigation. He was told by ken paxton the same thing that mark was told. He did not do anything, but the direction given to them both was the same. Find the truth. Let me repeat that. The direction that paxton gave him in this corrupt, invasive, corrosive, bribery, horrible scheme the direction he gave the man who worked for him was exactly the same direction he gave brandon. Find the truth. We are going to impeach a sitting attorney general for giving the direction find the truth . Not one person, not one piece of evidence will you here with a stateline or ken paxton told him to live, cheat, steal. That did not happen. That didnt happen. Yet here we sit, with 31 of you, 50 of us, here we sit when the allegation when the truth is he said find the truth. What are we doing here . I will be honest. The baseless complaints that he referred to, it was not a baseless complaint. The Travis County das Office Referred it to the ags office and ultimately the second one to brandon. It may not be the sexiest complaint, but it was not baseless. Fact four. No one bothered to tell brandon. I got a bit histrionic about that. Another of my friends, johnny sutton, former United States attorney who worked under w, a great lawyer to find value find fine fellow, they have talked about ken paxton going into all of these things. But there were trying to hire an outside lawyer. Youve got to be asking yourself, why did paxton hire him . He believed in good faith. He asked his deputies to investigate. His direction was seek the truth. Little to nothing in terms of an actual investigation. He asked again that nothing really happened, no one seemed to be interested in any of it. For two months it just sat there. The one guy before ken paxton comes to our families, he does nothing. He does absolutely nothing. He interviews outside lawyers and again he gave the same investigation instruction. At no time did he ever seek to impede, impair, obstruct. One of my favorite things youre going to see, dave maxwell is this 66 texas ranger, iconic figure. He is going to say he was asked to participate in any legal investigation. Really . And illegal investigation and on video according to you, if youre worldview is rocking, they asked you on videotape to participate in an illegal investigation and you just sat there like a bump on a log . You did not arrest anybody, make a note, it was illegal and you were asked to purchase a page and literally there you sat. This is our legendary one right, one ranger in action doing nothing. Really . Paxton just wanted it investigated. Mr. Busby stole a little of my thunder on the letterhead issues. But the point might be worth stating again. Who in the world do these people think they are . If your chief of staff came in and scraped your name off the letterhead and send it out, how much longer do you think they would be working for you . They wouldnt be. And they shouldnt be. Who in the world gave these people that idea . Who told these people was going to be ok . I bet the evidence is no one. They took it upon themselves. They deputized themselves and it was some sort of power ranger team where they could just do whatever they wanted, scrape ken paxtons name off the letterhead and send these letters out. Mr. Busby also talked to you about the letter to paxton. I think it bears repeating. Under their worldview, the one who represents nepal writes a letter to his suppose it coconspirator, threatens to speak dutch sue sue them. Claiming inappropriate coordination to undermine the investigation, alleging obstruction to prevent the investigation. Literally bringing suits against one of his what in the real world would be a coconspirator. What is next . A hired hitman suing for breach of contract when he does not get paid for the kill . This makes absolutely no sense. None. And the reason it makes no sense is because there was no illegal relationship between paxton and paul. I understand why there are rules about paxton doing things that most of you would think, i dont know about that. Heres why paxton was different. These claims with ken paxton that nate paul was making, they resonated with him. They may not have resonated with you. But i will suggest luckily you have not gone through what ken paxton has gone through for the last eight years. How do i know eight years . Because i have been by his side on that this texas state securities fraud case. He believes he has been the target of a wrongful prosecution. Number one, it is for six years at that point, in 2020 when the firm was hitting the fan. You have four minutes left. Thank you. Two, i believe the court has said all four of those counts are out of this trial. My objection is he should not be talking about this based on what the court is released. We are not allowed to talk about it, how can he get up there and give his version of the . Im talking about general paxtons mindset as to why these claims were resonating. His talking about a judge, the the facts, i object. Sustained. Ken paxton was viewing things from a much different viewfinder than you or i might have been viewing goes through. Theres a reason why he was viewing things differently to a different viewfinder than you and i. Because of what he had experienced. And it was not what you and i had experienced for the last eight years. Let get this through soy dont offend him any further. Heres the difference between what the house did and what you have to do. What you cannot do is assume anything. What you must do is look through the viewfinder beyond a reasonable doubt. That is a much different process than what the house did. Is there proof beyond all reasonable doubt for you to convict ken paxton . It is Crystal Clear there is not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It will one simple asked. Do the right thing. We ask for the lords help on that, do the right thing and the right thing is to vote not guilty. Thank you for your time. You have 42 minutes and 34 seconds returned to you and you have one minute 17 seconds returned to you. There he is. [applause]