One last pre-trial look at Warren Kenneth Paxton's oiliness

In the one hand I have shit; in the other, I have Ken Paxton!

First, state Senatecritters like Charlie Geren, as well as Housecritters on the GOP side who voted for impeachment, don't like Defend Texas Liberty PAC targeting them.

Speaking of, I got texted by Defend Texas Liberty PAC or whoever the hell, to sign a petition. They were targeting David Spiller (my state House legiscritter and of course one of the impeachment managers). I texted back that he was a lawyer himself and knew what he was doing, that for a Rethug, he'd make a much better AG than Paxton should Warren be convicted, Strangeabbott want him as a permanent replacement and he be interesting. I added that, if Christofascist Tim Dunn hadn't given them enough money, I'd mail a bag of dog feces for the cause. Then, of course, told them they were blocked.

Second, Warren K. and Angela together visited Kosovo (not reported by DPS when itemizing security costs for their trip to Europe), the most corrupt country in Europe (Ukraine is generally regarded as No. 2 by actual leftists, #BlueAnon), but why? The Observer reports that it was essentially for money-laundering kind of reasons, related to an apparent shell company where Angela is on the board of directors. Oh, their friend who met with them and the Kosovo Parliament? James Frinzi is also a friend of Trump. Perhaps that's part of what's driving all this pushback. 

Third? So you don't get confused? The Monthly's Mimi Swartz has a "cheat sheet" of the charges, the players, etc. That piece reminds us that Der Grüppenführer, Danny Goeb, aka Dan Patrick, has gotten $3 million from Defend Texas Liberty himself over the years.

This:

Patrick also knows the attorney general could be a political rival for, say, governor, and might even think acquitting Paxton could be a political liability. (That sending Paxton packing could be good for the people of Texas hasn’t really come up.) If that’s the case, the question is: can he get rid of the AG without looking like he’s the one getting rid of the AG?

About sums things up. Sort of.

Contra Mimi, I don't think Danny Boy is interested in challenging Strangeabbott (whose thoughts on the case haven't even been rumored for state media consumption) in 2026. And, he'll have a duty to retire in 2030. A more likely take is that Danny Boy is looking for someone more pliable than Strangeabbott to fill that chair.

Per the numbers? Half of Senate Rethugs must vote to convict, assuming all Dems do. Swartz doubts that. Tis true that 70 percent of the House GOP voted to impeach, but the Senate has long trended more conservative, in part due to its smaller size and bigger districts.

Per the Christofascists, my Senatecritter, Springer, is one of their targets. I'll give you at least 50-50 odds he votes to acquit.

And, beyond Christofascists, just plain old fascists like Former Fetus Forever Fuckwad Jonathan Stickland are rowing their oars.

On the political angle, the Chronic notes that it's House Speaker Dade "Dade" Phelan, not Danny Boy, who really has the most on the political line. If Warren K is not convicted, the Tim Dunn crowd will go hard after any remnants of even slightly Joe Straus type Rethugs in the House. The piece notes that DTL went 0-19 in 2022 primaries, but an acquittal would certainly change that. Even more fun, per the piece, would be a conviction, but one with only one or two votes to spare.

As for his testifying? As I said in my previous update, I think it's possible he could be compelled to get on a witness stand, but that Paxton could plead the Fifth as soon as that happens. I would assume Danny Boy's new legal counsel has advised him on that. (Sidebar: This shows a definite stupidity of the state constitution; were we the feds, the head of the Texas Supreme Court would be presiding.)

Fourth, as for time frame? I had originally thought the first week would suffice. Then, we got the 4,000 page document dump, and I said it would take most the second week. Now, we have Warren personally going on the attack, along with others. I wouldn't be surprised if at least part of a third week isn't eaten up. Danny Boy, in this Trib piece about him temporarily forswearing campaign contributions during the trial, agrees.

==

For a trial-start capper, Pro Publica has a piece on Paxton's politicization of the office by who he has, and hasn't, defended among state agencies and entities.

==

First update: Motions to dismiss failed 24-6. My nutter, Springer, was NOT in the 6. The six who were in his corner? Bob Hall zero surprise. Not much more on Tan Parker or Lois Cockwhore. (Thanks for that one from long ago, Brains.)

Besides the motions to dismiss, some motions got up to 10 senators. Springer was nay on all 10, which means Dunn and Stickland can't peel him off on the verdict vote, it seems. Ditto for Kelly Hancock.

The second biggest motion was to exclude evidence from before his current term. That failed 22-8. Sorry, Mimi Swartz, but your crystal ball might be broken.

Without a floor vote, Danny Boy did grant the motion to exclude Paxton from testifying.

==

And, I was not paid to write this post by Brad Parscale.

==

And, did I say "three weeks"? Per this Trib piece about the first week, and the overall speed? We'll be here a month or more.