Update, Sept. 13: The Rivard Report says there's a common thread on the "Bonnen Ten" he wanted to target. All, Republicans and Democrats, opposed the Bonnen-backed bill that would have made it illegal for local governments to hire lobbyists, or even to belong to alleged lobbying associations like the Texas Municipal League or Texas Association of Counties.
The Report notes that the bill wasn't at its first rodeo this year, but Joe Straus as speaker had always eighty-sixed it. This alone shows how far right of Straus Bonnen is.
So, note to Texas Democrats? If you don't win the House, but do increase your numbers, look for somebody who is to the left of Bonnen within the GOP as a new dance partner. The leverage is yours.
Related? At the Trib, Jay Root and Cassandra Pollock have gotten a voicemail of Bonnen denying Mucus' allegations.
Per that piece, yes, Bonnen's trust level in the House may be beyond repair. Texas Dems, see "leverage" above.
Update, Oct. 16: As has been reported everywhere, Mucus has released what he says is a full, unedited tape, plus a transcript.
Looks even worse for Bonnen than before. He comes off as more anti-Democrat than before, and even worse for trying to hold on to the Straus Republicans, comes off as very anti-local government. Per a few paragraphs below, I think Jim Schutze gets this right. Bonnen is a Mucus ass-kisser, always has been and always shall remain.
For Dems, if they get closer to 75 next year November, but don't go over, are they going to look for a new dance partner? (This assumes Bonnen is still even around. I don't think he's on too thin of ice legally, but does he get primaried? Face a serious general election challenge?)
Here's the skinny, as we await what the white cowboy hat boys report back, or don't report back, to the Lege, and what it then tells, or doesn't tell, the general public.
What this really is about, as Jim Schutze cuts to the chase, is what he says the lamestream media (or, as I call them, the Austin version of inside the Belway stenos, or Mopac stenos) won't report: "Christo-fascist Tim Dunn." The subhed is about how Speaker Dennis Bonnen, as Schutze points out in exquisite and painful detail, has long, long kissed the ass of Dunn's consigliere and fixer Michael Quinn Sullivan, the normally-known-as Mucus.
As I see it, behind all of this (nutgraf at bottom) Bonnen and Mucus may have been talking at some time, then things broke down. Schutze's backstory and timeline details only increases that likelihood, IMO.
And, Aug. 9, Dallas-area state Rep. Ana-Marie Ramos, reportedly named on the tape, sued Sullivan individually and an "unknown named political committee," (presumably Empower Texas?), to get it released.
OTOH, the Snooze reports that many Republicans fear the tape's release would lead to mutual destruction within the GOP.
The House General Investigating Committee is going to take a look at the mess. It started meeting today. Per that link, the suit above is the state Democratic Party's and not just Ramos' baby. Getcha popcorn.
While there was some speculation that Bonnen — and House GOP Caucus leader Justin Burrows of Lubbock — could avoid any potential criminal liability by fully spilling the beans at the meeting, based on a reading of committee language, so far, that ain't happening. The committee met for about an hour and then voted to call in the Texas Rangers. Bonnen says he's fine with that; Mucus has not had a comment in any media writing up the meeting and the vote.
Oh, Schutze is right here, to a T. The Snooze's story today (not linking) as well as the "mutual destruction" one, for example? Dunn is not mentioned a single time.
Will the committee subpoeana Mucus about the tape, if he hasn't released the full thing to the public, whether voluntarily or under the force of the Ramos suit? Will the Rangers seek that tape as part of their remit? (Remember, Mucus has sponsored James O'Keefe type stuff in the past, one of the worst actions at the Schutze link.) Will there be a division within the committee, either on partisan lines or others, of how much laundry to air? What if Mucus says (whether he actually did or not) that the tape was destroyed, that it has an 18 1/2 minute gap, etc?
As first reported a week ago Bonnen blinked when Mucus first mentioned taping the meeting. As per others, I'm puzzled as to why Bonnen met Mucus in the first place on such a situation, and why he didn't assume in advance Mucus was taping him. He may be a rookie as Speaker but he's not a freshman as a legiscritter.
As for the result? He WILL face a Speakership challenge, assuming of course that Dems don't capture a House majority. (If that happens, he'll never be Speaker again.) He'll survive, by reaching across the aisle, but the price of survival will be higher.
Up in Texoma, Drew Springer, a Bonnen ally (interesting how someone who's a full-on wingnut in some ways, IMO, nonetheless isn't an ally of them overall, isn't it?) says that party rank-and-file have said almost nothing. At that link, Bob Garrett notes the House GOP caucuses in October. Circle that on your calendar. Burrows, who was in on the meeting, could be forced out. (He resigned as of Aug. 16.)
As for House wingnuts, not to mention their Senate counterparts, thinking Bonnen is too Dem-cozy? Well, two of the 16 state Senate committees have Democritter chairs. True, Whitmire and Lucio are ConservaDems, but still. But, the big deal is that Bonnen, like Straus, reflects a traditional, as in pre-Danny Goeb as Lite Guv, degree of bipartisanship in House committee operations; the Trib has more.
One other thing I don't get is Bonnen naming specific Dem names. Was it to tell Mucus that he thought he was being evenhanded? Or was it a quid pro quo to go say, "Look, I'll give you free reign on whoever you recruit against these freshman Dems in exchange for ..." Per a summary of the tape blogged by a Mucus ally, Daniel Greer, that seems to be the case. But that's still within the big picture of Bonnen seeking to reign in Mucus.
And that's the dumb part. Joe Straus, for all his own fakery in not being THAT far different from many harder-right House members (no I don't really miss you yet and "good luck" against Abbott if that is your plan, knew that was simply impossible.
Related dumbery is Bonnen thinking Mucus cares about the House GOP as a whole, or a GOP House majority where not all are forsworn to Christo-fascist Dunn. Rather, Mucus would probably revel in the GOP losing control in 2020 as an excuse to boot Bonnen and go for a wingnut as potential 2022 speaker.
That said, per the new Sept. 13 updates, this is looking less and less like Bonnen caring and more and more like Bonnen trying to figure out the terms of mutual backscratching.
In turn, Mucus figured he'd landed his fish, and so started moving his Overton Window rightward, and eventually went too far for Bonnen.
There's one other puzzling thing. Per Chris Hooks' longform at the Texas Monthly, Mucus waited until six weeks after the meeting to go public. I'll assume that means negotiations of some sort were happening until a breakdown. Is THAT more embarrassing to both sides than the tape itself? And, if I am barking up the right tree, how far along were negotiations and what eighty-sixed them?
The Snooze's James Barrigan has more details of the timeline. Tis true that Mucus rejected any alleged offer early on, but even that took a full week. And it took another full week for Bonnen to respond that there was no offer.
Folks, negotiations were happening. I don't have to be an inside the Mopac steno to know that.
Also, per Barrigan, Mucus, not Bonnen, surely led in the tracks-covering. Witness that it only took one day, not a full week, after Mucus said "I got a tape!" for retiring Former Fetus Forever Fuckwad Jonathan Stickland to call on Bonnen to resign.
Speaking of tracks-covering? Aug. 23, Gov. Strangeabbott publicly endorsed the just-resigned Burrows. I presume rumors were already floating about Christo-fascist Tim Dunn wanting Burrows primaried? The Trib adds that even Danny Goeb is calling for party unity on this issue, rather than publicly backing Mucus, as one might think.
==
Ross Fischer, former head of the Texas Ethics Commission, says "Hardball politics is not a crime." He's right ... IF this is not a crime. And, this is the former head of a ball-less, spineless state agency even by Texas standards.
R.G. Ratcliffe reminds us that, even if it began as hardball politics, there are still plenty of possible criminal charges.
My thought? Tea Party Rethugs and Bonnenites will get the House committee to accept (and seal, if possible?) the stRangers report and then whitewash to the public while tamping down Ramos and Hinojosa and state Dems as much as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are appreciated, as is at least a modicum of politeness.
Comments are moderated, so yours may not appear immediately.
Due to various forms of spamming, comments with professional websites, not your personal website or blog, may be rejected.