Transcripts For CSPAN Closing 20240703 : vimarsana.com

Impeach attorney general ken paxton held closing arguments before the state senate. Paxton faces 16 charges which include using his office to protect a political donor under fbi investigation. If found guilty he would become the first texas statewide official convicted on impeachment charges and more than 100 years. Mr. President , members of the senate. Over the senate has faithfully carried out its constitutional duty to listen to the evidence. The framers of our constitution have a heavy and solemn responsibility on this chamber. The house did not come here lightly. We discovered unprecedented abuse in the Texas Attorney Generals Office by mr. Paxton. As elected officials, we take an oath to protect the systems of the state in the sacred public trust. The constitution charges us with policing our own. If we dont keep Public Officials from abusing the capacity of their offices, then frankly no one can. Mr. Paxtons attorney would like to remind everyone that he was elected by 4. 2 million voters, but they have blindly ignored the facts that he has ultimately ended up serving one person himself. He explained mr. Paxtons abusive office and perhaps the most distinct way, and i will direct you to your screen. I was deeply concerned that the name, authority and power of my office had been hijacked to serve the interest of an individual against the interests of the broader public. Ken paxton was able to build an exceptional executive management team. Mr. Paxtons top advisors were thrilled to go work for him. They came to the office because he they believed in him and what he stood for. They were conservative hardworking experts in their field with principles. He had hired the best and brightest to help run his office. He explains at the beginning of the trial that these advisors were committed to the rule of law and to conservative governance. In this trial you have heard from a of mr. Paxtons top and one time, most trusted advisors. There have been several discussions about what the evidence is, but of course the testimony is evident. Mr. Paxtons advisors were excited about what the office was doing for texas. They circled around mr. Paxton and work diligently to advance the promise that he had made to voters. The travesty is that mr. Paxtons desire to deliver results for nate paul eventually tore the office apart. It metastasized and overwhelmed the office. But ken paxton abandon and betrayed his trust in staff, his conservative principles, and his commitment to family values, the law and oath of office. He repeatedly demanded that his top death duties act as nate calls personal lawyers and not the state lawyers. He gave the keys to the office. His lawyers have come in here and tried to normalize his behavior. They are not denying that ken paxton did any of the acts alleged. Instead, they want you to believe there was nothing wrong with mr. Paxton ignoring his senior staffs repeated warnings about nate paul. Texas Ranger David Maxwell did not mince words. Your screen please. They allegations made by nate paul is that they were absolutely ludicrous, without merit, not even reason to believe that a crime had been committed. The nation of the allegations that he was making were against the fbi, and investigated with the texas state security board, two u. S. Attorneys, the federal senior federal magistrate, mark lane, and the others who were involved in the signing and execution of the search warrants on his place that is historic and also his own. It is clear mr. Paxtons judgment was completely clouded by his distrust of Law Enforcement. But his failed judgment does not include his abusive office. Mr. Paxton wants you to find that even though nate pauls story was a ludicrous, that it was completely fine for him to hire a fiveyear practicing attorney as an outside attorney to do mr. Pauls bidding. He wants you to find that it was completely ok for mr. Paxton and nate pauls lawyer to direct him to the issue grand jury subpoenas against judges, court clerks, police officers, and the self of a lawyer involved in a civil lawsuit involved with nate paul. They even want you to believe that going and getting a grand jury subpoena isnt really a big deal. This suggestion is absurd. The ability to issue a grand jury subpoena is a substantial power wielded by our government and allowing a private citizen to take that power to attack the enemy is truly shocking. In mr. Paxton has admitted that he does not know much about criminal law. When he asked for money from this chamber, to settle the lawsuit filed by Staff Members he wrongfully terminated, he wouldnt even answer a senators question about the hiring of mr. Cannick. Instead, he went to a staff member that he said was Better Qualified to answer. But when it came to nate paul and his request, all mr. Paxman paxton is deaf. He refused to reply on the expertise of his staff. He balked at their warnings, and then he hid his actions when he went around him and his attempts to move forward in helping nate paul. And he is continuing to claim he knows best. He is sitting here today, saying that he was completely entitled to do what he did, and that these witnesses were part of some deep state compared deep state conspiracy. But once again mr. Paxtons claims are divorced from reality. The fact that every action complained of wouldve benefited nate paul is not mere happenstance. As mr. Paxtons counsel has said, there are no coincidences in office. Lets be clear about what happened here. Mr. Paxton enjoyed the power of his office. He enjoyed his relationship with nate paul, it facilitated the life mr. Paxton wanted. And mr. Paxton willingly and blindly wielded the power he loves so as to maintain the relationship he needed. This is wrong. The power of the office of attorney general cannot and should not be handed over to a private citizen to use to attack their perceived enemy. Mr. Paxton claims that he wants to truth, but he hasnt even bothered to be here for the whole trial. He came on the first day, he left at lunch, and hes here for closing. Clearly he thinks that he might just get away with this. Had he been here, he couldve seen the hundreds of exhibits in the thousands of pages that have been presented to you, with 13 witnesses over seven days. That the house has meticulously laid before you. Mr. Paxton put the risk of the citizens of texas, of the businesses of texas, and the lives of Law Enforcement at stake. As the states top cop, this conduct is and was inexcusable. His actions are precisely the type of grave official wrongs that our Supreme Court has explained merit impeachment. He may claim to be one of us, but unlike the Public Servants here today, he has no regard for the principles of honor and integrity. He has betrayed us and the people of texas, and if hes given the opportunity, he will continue to abuse the power given to him. Mr. President , i yield the rest of my time for my closing. There is shame here, and the shame sits right there, that they would bring this case in this chamber with no evidence. I am proud to represent attorney general ken paxton. If this can happen to him, it can happen to anyone. Now, you heard when we started this case, you heard in the media that the evidence is 10 times worse than the public knows and what a farce that was. What a farce that was. What we had seen instead is a bunch of supposition, nights might, maybe, could have been, thats what weve seen in this trial. The very first witness they brought to you, the very first witness they brought to you its not working. Crumbled under oath. Do you remember . Do you remember judgments here, crumbled under oath. So what is this case about . Its about nothing, its about nothing. Think about it. They failed to gather all the evidence, they failed to review their own evidence, they failed to talk to all the witnesses. Think about this. Brett webster, the first assistant, did they bring him here . Did they even bother to ask him a question . They didnt even ask him a question. He is the man who reviewed a document and documented every single thing that occurred. They didnt even call him. Do you know why they didnt call him . Because he put to bed all of their foolishness and silliness. They didnt take any sworn testimony, they let witnesses assume and speculate. They failed to even understand the law, and they couldnt even write the articles correctly. Look at the articles that the judge just read to you. They used words, their own witnesses admit there was no attorney pro tem. They used words like, the attorney general failed to protect charity, that is not the attorney generals job. And let me make sure we are clear about something. When the house board of managers brought this case, they made an assumption, they assumed that this man would quit. They assumed that this man would run and hide. They assumed that attorney general ken paxton would resign, well, guess what, he did not resign, he is proud, and is ready to go back to work. And after this is over, i expect he will go back to work. He has been a rock, he has been a rock in that office, the office has attorney general has accomplished more than any Attorney Generals Office in the country, you heard it from the witness stand, bidens policies come to die in texas because attorney general ken paxton, lets talk about the burden of proof, weve heard about the burden of proof here and there can we get this working . Of been informed that the powerpoint connection to your screens stopped as soon as you begin. There are no coincidences in austin. We will stop the clock here for a moment. We will take just a moment, can we get this going, please . I need it for the senators to see the screens. I think we are ready. Do you want to scream to catch up to where you are . Yes, sir. They thought he would quit. They thought they could bring a bunch of people, 15 people, not put under oath with a bunch of suppositions, guesses, mites and maybes and thought he would quit. The texas tribune, the dallas morning news, the houston chronicle, they thought he would quit, he did not quit. He did not quit and he will not quit. Lets talk about the burden of proof. That is super important here. And i want you, senators, please, to look at your screen and look at the burden of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond a reasonable doubt. That means, that means that you have no doubts that are reasonable. That is an incredibly high burden. Could you imagine if we were in any criminal court in the United States that this case would not have already been dismissed based on what we heard from this witness stand. We would not be in final arguments. This case would be over. But this is not a criminal trial. This is a political trial. I would suggest to you this is a political witch hunt. I would suggest to you that this trial has displayed, for the country to see, a partisan fight within the republican party. Lets just call it for what it is. Thats what we are seeing here. Its being played out on tvs across the country, there is a battle for power because theres no doubt that these folks did not prove a case. They didnt prove a preponderance, they did not prove anything other than they dont like ken paxton. Remember this fellow, greg cox. Remember that guy . Maybe, potentially, possibly, might have, perhaps, conceivably, could be, he testified that the Attorney Generals Office was so corrupt, they are involved in organized crime, you know what, i want to work there. What a joke. What a joke. I had texts from my former marine corps buddies that said that guy is a joke. To come in here, in the senate of texas, and to get on the stand, and these people sponsored this guy. What a joke he was. And in my view, thats exactly what their entire case has been, a joke. A much should do about nothing much to do about nothing. Look at the burdens of proof, senators. Beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, if you decided this case from the houston chronicle, the texan tribune, the dallas morning news. Oh my goodness, ken paxton, guilty. But there aint no evidence to support it. The only evidence we have in this case is they dont like ken paxton, and there is no doubt, there have been hundreds upon hundreds, upon the hundreds of articles about ken paxton and how bad ken paxton is. Everybody has heard it and guess what, the voters heard it. Guess what, ken paxton one hands down victory. He be the latest in line for the bushes. Let it be known, let it be clear now, the bush era in texas ends today. We thought it had ended in the primary when ken paxton beat george p. Bush 6832. Well, we thought it was over, it wasnt, now we have an impeachment, it ends today. They can go back to main. This is texas. This case has been nothing more than assumptions. You know what my dad used to tell me, assumptions make and asked out of you and me. And that has been the entire case, its all built on assumptions, and jumping to conclusions. Thank you about it, how it was paid for by nate. You know how sad this is. I had to come here on behalf of the attorney general of the stated texas and disprove the case because he was convicted in the press. And now we know i had to prove it to young true wicker. That man believes i heard a straight, and i jumped to the conclusion that the house repairs were paid for by nate paul, we all know that was wrong. We all know now that was wrong, but that was in more than 100 articles across our country. Smearing this mans name, smearing his wifes name, swearing smearing a member of this bodys name. We all saw it when we put this young man under oath and showed him the documents. Guess what, it didnt happen, wasnt true, and that is indicative of their entire case. We should not be in a position where we have to come in here and prove our innocence, but we did. The referral from the das office none of them knew he had a second referral. You know why because it went directly to mr. Cannick. They didnt know about the direct referral from the das office. And you remember Margaret Moore, she came in here and tried to pretend like she didnt know anything about it because she wasnt supervising her staff. Her staff knew all about it, her top lieutenant knew all about it. They assumed the chemic contract was never executed, but now we all have seen that ken paxton signed that contract. They assume that laura olsons job was not legitimate, but now we have seen her employment contract. Weve seen her application, weve seen that she is still working for worldclass properties and still doing real work, they assumed. They assumed that young man wicker delivered a secret package in the middle of the night, in a dark alley, never happened. But if you were to watch the news, and read the newspaper, oh my goodness, that happened. Even a texas ranger. Think about this for a minute. You have a guy, 66, wheres the hat. Cloaked with the authority of the state, comes in here and says to these folks, i heard from five or six people that true wicker delivered a secret true wicker delivered a secret passage, in the dark of night in an alleyway on behalf of nate paul. Totally false. And he was asked, who told you that, ranger. I cant even give you one name who told me that. Totally false. I asked if he ever delivered anything at night, if you ever delivered anything that has to do with public records, no, never, didnt happen. Look at the position these people have put this man in and his wife. Prove your innocence, attorney general. Youve been convicted in the press, prove your innocence now. If it can happen to him, it can happen to anyone. Foreclosures were stopped. A press statement. Multiple float multiple foreclosures were stopped because of an informal guidance. Now we know thats false. Presumed false. In these people, these people got up here and used words like conspiracy, crimes, bribery, all kinds of really loaded words and all were false. In this young man vassar, who cried on the stand in front of all of you because he has been called a rogue employee, at the very time he was called a rogue employee he was joking and laughing and poking fun and calling his new boss, brett webster, a jerk. But when he came in here at the urging of these people, he cried. He cried because he had been called a rogue employee. What is a rogue employee . A rogue employee is somebody that doesnt do what the boss says. You dont do what the boss says let me tell you something, when i was a captain in the United States marine corps and my Staff Sergeant didnt do what i told him to do. He can register his disagreement , but when the rubber meets the road and i tell him, this is what we are going to do, he does it or he resigns. What he doesnt do, what he should not do, what you should never do is go behind my back, cooked up our complaints, cook up a bunch of foolishness and go to the authorities. Thats not how its supposed to work. This guy, mr. Vassar, mr. Vassar came here, cried on the stand about being a rogue employee, but the truth is, at the same time he was called a rogue employee, he was laughing and joking about it. What foolishness is this. Its been three years since the socalled whistleblowers now think about what a whistleblower means. That means that you have to have evidence of a crime and they admitted they had no evidence of a crime. And what have we heard from the fbi with regard to attorney general ken paxton . Crickets, nothing. Nothing. You dont think, if you dont think that the Biden Administration and its Fbi Department of justice would not love, would not love to indict ken paxton, then you are not paying attention. Theyve done nothing. You know why theyve done nothing, because theres nothing to do. This man did his job. And he should still be doing his job. Staffers were not only wrong on their assumptions, they were wrong on the law. Can you believe that they didnt realize that the only person in that office that can actually have the authority to sign an outside counsel contract was ken paxton himself. And anybody else was designated. Hes the only one that can do that. They didnt like that. This is a situation where the tail is wagging the dog. Imagine if one of your Staff Members at some point decided that, you know what, i dont think my boss has authority. I know more than the boss, so im going to be in charge now. Thats not how it works. 4. 2 Million People decided who the attorney general would be. They didnt elect jeff, ryan, mike, none of those people. Those are political appointees. Serving at the pleasure of the attorney general just like everyone of your staff are as well. They even had the nerve to come here, in front of you and say, i believe that when ken paxton was in ohio, doing his job and trying to put together a group of attorney generals in a case against google, hes out of the state now, we are in charge. That is not how it works. That is not how it works. Lets cook up a bar complaint against ken paxton. Lets allocate 50,000 to hire an outside lawyer by the name of Johnny Sutton without any approval or telling the boss. They figured out, real quickly, once they talked to maxwell, you know what, we dont have anything. We need to beef this up, we dont have anything. And even though it has been three years, they still dont have anything. 17 lawyers over there, working since may, 500 an hour for each of them. Hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted. Taxpayer money wasted, and they still dont have anything. Now, how did this happen . They made some assumptions, and then they figured out they had no evidence, and it was too late to turn back. Recall that one of the witnesses , mr. Banker said, once we went to the fbi, we were signing our death warrant. Rightly so. You go to the authorities with no evidence and accuse your boss of a crime and there has been no crime and no evidence of any crime, and its all a bunch of supposition and guesswork, rightly so. So they took a long walk on a short period the house managers did the same, the house managers did the same. They, in a four hour hearing decided to impeach the attorney general of the state of texas and then they spent months and months trying to collect evidence to support it, and they did not. They failed. And then the lobbyists got involved. The text of support, tlr. We spent 6 million against ken paxton, we could not beat him at the ballot box, maybe we can beat him in an impeachment trial. George p. Bush decided, let me read up my law license because maybe i can be the attorney general now. I couldnt beat him in a fair fight, maybe i can beat him here. And every one of these socalled whistleblowers, which were nothing but disgruntled x staffers, they are the same lawyer. Who just happens to be a protege of the bush regime, the bush era ends today in the state of texas. Have you ever met a lawyer that works for three years for free as a former u. S. Attorney . Whos doing legitimate work, legitimate work. I want to focus the allegations as best as i can tell of what nate paul provided to our attorney general are in three buckets. Campaign donations, house renovations and wholesome job. Lets focus on the first one. The allegation was there. You have to have a quid pro quo for bribery. They are throwing this word bribery around. That has a lot of meaning. In this case it has none. And lets focus on the person who supposedly bribed our attorney general. This pain in the but, this described pain in the but nate paul. Entitled, insistent, overbearing, manipulative, presumptuous, assertive, forceful, militant, he really believe that he had been abused by the federal authority. And let me ask you a question, do we really believe that the federal authorities do not sometimes abuse people, do we believe that, do we believe the fbi is always on the up and up . Do we really believe that the department of justice is always out to do the right thing, or can we all agree that sometimes they pick and they choose who they go after. And when the federal government comes after you, you better buckle down, this guy thought he had been targeted by the fbi. And the only thing that this man did was, lets find out the truth, lets see if thats really true, thats all he did, because he knows a little bit about people coming after you with no evidence. He can identify with that. Heck, we see it here, the very reason im standing here. He was come after by a group of misinformed, illadvised people with no evidence. Now, do i know whether that search warrant was altered, we will never know. We will never know. Nate paul thought it was, we will never know. And to suggest that the keys of the Attorney Generals Office were turned over to nate paul, look at his correspondence. He was madder than a hornets nest with the Attorney Generals Office, youre not doing your job, you have a conflict of interest, you guys are grossly negligent. He was mad. He was pistol he was because the Attorney Generals Office would not do what he wanted them to do. He wanted them to investigate. If you look at the correspondence from nate paul, senators, and you prepare it from what you just heard, you will see two different stories. Nate paul was very unhappy with the Attorney Generals Office. That does not sound like somebody who had the keys to the office. He kept accusing the Attorney Generals Office of not being neutral. He accused the Attorney Generals Office of having bias. He accuse the Attorney Generals Office of being in the bag for the foundation. He accuse the Attorney Generals Office of employing people that were against its interests. That does not sound like somebody whos running the Attorney Generals Office. There was one person running the Attorney Generals Office and that man is sitting right there in that man is the one who should be running the Attorney Generals Office at this day. But i urge you to look at the correspondence and compare it with what youve heard. Not only for these people, but in the media. Nate paul was very, very upset and very unhappy with the Attorney Generals Office. So much so, so much so that he threatened to sue. That he sent a letter and said, hold all of your correspondence because i am going to sue you guys for your negligence, for your bias, bias. When you look at the documents and you compare it to the arguments, you see a much different picture. Now, the allegations, the first bucket is a Campaign Donation of 25,000 dollars made in october of 2018. Everything that you have heard in this case was in 2020. Think about that for a minute. The entire case of Campaign Donation, a bribe, if you will, two years prior, complete ridiculousness, especially when you look out all the other people that nate paul gave money to, and especially when you look at their percentage, just in the year 2018 of the donations received by attorney general ken paxton. This man is a fundraiser. There is a reason he raises money politically because the people like what he does. The people like ken paxton. We know that a Campaign Donation as a basis for bribery is complete hogwash. Imagine, imagine if a Campaign Donation were considered to be a bribe two years before the act complained of. Lineup, we are going to be doing a lot of impeachments in the city of austin. That bucket has no validity. That bucket is empty. And look at the buckets of wet ken paxton supposedly did for nate paul, foreclosure guidance, public records and many intervention. But what you heard from a young man who spent more time with ken paxton than anybody, sometimes 24 7, 365 days a year, if there was never an agreement at all, he never agreed to do anything for nate paul and never got a darn thing from nate paul, with the exception of, a lunch. A lunch. A lunch that was public, on a patio for everybody to see. Most of the time you would think when people are doing something uncoerced, they want to hide it. These were public lunches for everybody to see. And if a lunch is a bribe, then boy, howdy, weve got a problem here, do we not. That holds no water. Lets look out article one. It fails, just in its language, these people dont even know the role of the Attorney Generals Office. It is not a public tractor of charity. Its protector of the Public Interest in sureties, and we know that previously, greg abbott as the attorney general has sued the foundation as a long and sordid history. But its not just a history of problems, there is a recent history starting in 2019, and i urge you to look at the evidence, at the memo that was submitted. At the memo that every one of ken paxtons subordinates reviewed before they all signed off on the intervention. This was not ken paxton causing anybody to do anything, this was subordinates who reviewed the evidence provided and decided we need to intervene, and it goes on and on. People punching their spouse, people being indicted for this and that. All kinds of problems. The most important problem, the thing i think that the subordinates were really concerned about, this charity that was only worth 15 million total, is investing 3 million into a speculative land deal. The bottom line is, every whats so ironic, and whats so egregious is that every Single Person who signed off on the intervention in the first article of impeachment, came here and testified that thats somehow wrong, but they were involved in it. Utter hypocrisy. They not only signed off on the intervention, which only lasted three months, but they also signed off of an investigation of the foundation. That article failed. Did they prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt with that article . The only thing weve seen beyond reasonable doubt that has major problems and that the ags office intervened and now the Foundation Stands to make millions upon millions upon millions of dollars on their investment. And i wish i could get an investment like that. 3 million investment, they stand to make almost 20 million. That hurts really good, doesnt it . So we know the intervention is hogwash. Lets go to the written legal opinions under article two. It fails on its face because there was no written legal opinion. You heard our Lieutenant Governor explained to you that they have to prove what is in the articles. They cannot prove this article because there was never a written legal opinion. The article is over. But its over. You can see it, this is informal guidance. This is not a legal opinion. But lets go a little further. They tried to drag senator hughes into this foolishness, and put his name in this article , for what reason, i dont know, and act like having a strong request was somehow wrong. And we all know the people that work in the state business in this city know that strahl requests are common. Every one of the house board of managers has been a strahl requester at one point or another. To put that in a public article, to somehow this march senator hughes is foolishness. But what was in ken paxtons mind when he was looking for this informal guidance . If we want to know, we can look at his texts. His texts sent directly to mr. Bangor, who was working on the formal opinion. Look what he says. I think it will entice peoples lives in a good way if we do this right. Hundreds of people will be protected from harm and maybe devastation. These are realtime text. This is not three years later with a bunch of cooked up foolishness. This is the realtime thoughts of our attorney general as to what he was thinking with regards to the informal guidance. And did you hear drew wicker, when he was asked about that, he said he knew a little bit about it, general paxton said, we may prevent a grandmother from being thrown out of her home. And now they turn this upside down, they cooked it up and made it look somehow bad. And you know its most ironic is the president , the president at the time, at the time, donald trump, a month later, issued the same guidance. And we know nate paul put his entities in bankruptcies and there was never any foreclosures anyway. This is what we have to do, we have to get up here and prove our innocence. How wrong is that, and did you hear the financial guy from the bank get up here and talk about they didnt lose a penny. They not only didnt lose a penny, they made a fortune. That bucket is empty. Lets talk about the abuse of the open records process where we have seen that that is bull. Weve seen the abuse misuse of essential information, that was bull. Remember what your period. If there was a secret delivery in the dark of night and a sealed package with topsecret information, the problem with all that information was already released. It was already public. It was already public. And then when young drew was asked, you checked out for the general packet that had a cd in it, was that what you gave to nate paul, no, not at all. Total baloney. Never delivered any open records of nate paul, never delivered anything secret, that bucket is empty. Article five, the retention of chemic. They said he was a prosecutor pro tem, well, that crumbled on the stand, did it not . You have to vote on the language of the articles. That should be 300 there was never a prosecutor pro tem, game over, but, we still have to prove our innocence, so ridiculous. The office of the District Attorney made a referral. Mindy, i want you to please pay particular attention to her affidavit. She was one of the subordinates of the elected da and she made it very clear that it was her idea to do the referral. And you know what she said, i didnt think it was appropriate to send it to the Texas Rangers. I didnt think it was appropriate to send it to the fbi, so i referred her to the Attorney Generals Office. Guess what, it went to a texas ranger and a farmer u. S. Attorney and they didnt want to fool with it. Thats what you call a punt. We dont want to do it, lets punt it. Now they want to pretend like they were and evolve even though chemic didnt know how to do a grand jury subpoena so he had a rely on the das office to do it. They were actively involved, they helped him get a subpoena and never said it was wrong. They thought, im glad you are doing it but i dont want to investigate the people i work with. And then when it was over, they try to wash their hands of it all. With all due respect, typical politicians. And then lied about it Margaret Moore sent a letter that she made sure was in the press that she didnt have anything to do with this at all. We all know thats not true, and she didnt even mention that there had been a second referral referred directly from the das office directly from this young man, brandon cammack, and thats the reason he sent the subpoenas that the das office helped him to issue. And they want to blame that on ken paxton. Who had no idea about it. Chemic admitted, i never told him. It was my idea to get you a subpoena . I never told him who they were going to be issued to. Ken paxton cannot figure out why the devil would maxwell and pendley not do their jobs. Ken paxton had a chance to investigate the feds. He wanted to investigate the feds. He wanted to because he had seen how they operate, picking and choosing who they convict, who they charge, weaponizing, weaponizing the fbi, abusing their authority, he had an opportunity, he cannot understand why his subordinates would not do their jobs. Instead of fighting about it, he got outside counsel, and this young man, mr. Chemic, who had a signed contract from the attorney general of the state of texas, was dealing with somebody, the texas ranger had decided in his mind on a Google Search. Think about this, imagine. I hope dave maxwell never googles me. He had decided before he even looked at it that nate paul was a criminal. My god, if thats how criminal work is done, that your top cop and the ags office, based on a Google Search, decide somebodies or criminal, therefore i wont investigate his allegation of wrongdoing of the fed. Weve got a problem, weve got a problem. He decided on a Google Search that he wasnt going to do a darn thing he was never going to investigate his old outfit the Texas Rangers. He was never going to do that, he was in the hall of fame. And pendley wont investigate the fed because thats where he spent most of his career. Ken paxton said, look, theres an allegation, lets look into it. And the only thing he ever said was, just find the truth. So look at the points of view. Ken paxtons prism is sometimes the fed screws up. Chemics point of u. S. Or criminal defense lawyer is, sometimes those who are making allegations are wrong and screwup, maxwell and pendley, the feds never do anything wrong, the Texas Rangers never do anything wrong and everybody who set anybody who says they do, they are a criminal. God, thats terrifying. That should terrify everyone of you. And so he issued a subpoena and thought he was a special prosecutor. Outside counsel special prosecutor, whatever he was he had the authority of the ags office only to investigate, to investigate, thats what the young man was doing, he made it very clear in his testimony. He was young, inexperienced, sincere and energetic and he was at point blank, did you think this was baseless, heck no. I thought it was persuasive, i thought it was convincing. And i was excited to be involved in it. Because if what was being alleged were true, that would be a big deal. The only thing that ken paxton ever told that young man is, speak the truth. Thats what i suggest to you, seek the truth. Nate paul got nothing. Nothing. Its a darn shame that we have to come and prove that, but we did. In these whistleblowers, in order to be a whistleblower, in order to be a whistleblower, you have to have a good faith belief that a crime has occurred. In order to have a good faith belief that a crime has occurred, you have to have evidence, and you heard mr. Vasser admit when he went to the fbi he had none. He had some guesses, he had some maybes, and if these folks wouldve done their job, you would have had to spend the last two weeks of your time doing their job. And you can tell from the texts, you can tell from the text of the socalled whistleblowers, which what they really are is disgruntled ex staffers, they were combative, they were insubordinate, they called their brandnew boss a joke. How long was somebody on your staff last if they were texting their colleagues calling you a joke . You will fire them on the spot. He is a joke, we all know that when you bring in a new chief of staff, when you have a disagreement with your chief of staff and you bring in somebody else, that chief of staff is going to make sure that she or he brings in their own people, thats the way it works in politics, political appointees. And when you come in and you talk to your subordinates, and they say, i will work with you, what happens then . They leave. Nobody was ever mistreated, nobody was ever talked down to, they were treated with respect. Thats not what brent westergaard in return. What he got in return was screams, shouts, hollers and talking behind his back and calling him a joke. And then they joked about being fired. There were so torn up that they were joking amongst themselves, calling themselves the cool kids club. The investigative report, i encourage you to read it. Its very lengthy, its very lengthy, thats article seven, it is documented in detailed, it explains everything that happened, its a full investigation and its pretty darn good. And it lays out in great detail the events, and it has been the unrebutted. They had a chance to bring one of the authors of that report, who made sure that everything was documented, is lengthy, it has exhibit after exhibit, it demonstrates they did take the attorney generals name off of the letterhead. Its there in black and white, the emails back and forth when they did that is in that report. And how they throw around bribery. We know why they included this, because it captures headlines. It captures headlines, and you know why they mentioned laura olson because it mentions it captures headlines. They want to shame people. They want to be morally superior to us all. There is no reason to have done them. To this family. There is no reason to have done that to this family. This woman got a job, on her own merit, and she continues to work even today. She is getting checks from her job in austin, she has an apartment, she pays for her own apartment. That bucket is empty. I am not going to spend too much time on this but let me say i am certainly not perfect and i assume all if you feel the same. We all have sinned and fallen short. The only person that cannot be forgiven is somebody who is so cynical they do not ask for forgiveness. If this impeachment is based on a marital impropriety, then line up. Lineup, we are going to be doing a lot of impeaching in this city. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Ashamed of yourselves. Bribery, they convinced through quicker drew wicker, it took me 20 minutes to disprove it. They never asked for any of those documents. They never even talked to the contractor. They didnt even bother, they assumed it was true and i had to come here on behalf of my client and disprove it. How wrong is that . And that was the most serious allegation, it was not just to get the attorney general of our state but it was against a senator in our state. Did you see young wickers face on the stand when i disproved it . I had to disprove it even to the general body. The press reports that again, i am going to be lining up a lot of lawsuits, that is absolute defamation. Because now we all know it is absolutely untrue. That was the entire basis of this case. Supposition and it can happen to you. No burner phones, no secret email address, no promise to help mate, no agreement, nothing. Nothing you should be ashamed. For what you have done here. We showed you the transaction from front to back. Now, there was a suggestion that he decided to pay because he knew they went to the fbi. Total baloney the documents show something completely different. I urge you to look at the texts on the payment, look at the usaa documents, he was fighting for paying for the renovations and repairs. Every bucket of what general paxton supposedly received, every bucket of what nate paul supposedly deceived, empty. Supposedly received, empty. What do they do now . You settle a lawsuit, a lawsuit was brought against the attorney general office. And you want to the legislature which is what you are required to do. The reason we decided to settle it, the reason they were begging to settle the case is because they did not know what the Supreme Court was going to do. And ken paxton delegated that. He said settle it if you think it is appropriate. That was put before the legislature and the legislature says no, we will not pay it. They were begging. The very people that came here to testify where the very people begging to get paid. It makes me mad. You have 10 minutes remaining. Mr. Buzbee so the hail mary, roger stop back lets throw in a bunch of malarkey at the end. Conspiracy, although there is no agreement, misappropriation, never happen, a religion of duty, there were licked of duty. Unfit for office, no evidence to support any of the articles, there is no evidence to support any of these articles. These are thrown in later because as you deliberate there will be somebody who says all right, there is no proof, that we have this article. With got to get him we have got to get him dont do that. That is not based on evidence. That aint the way it works. Throw it out the wall and hope something sticks. That aint the way it works in court and that should not be the way it works in a historic impeachment proceeding. It holds no water. So why are we here . We are here because dade phelan got his feelings hurt. He was so drunk handling house business, knowing full well that they had no evidence to support an impeachment. When ken paxton says, you embarrassed the devil out of yourself, you should resign, they set up the process and impeached this man. You have seen the video, it is all over the internet. I favorite author, said justice limps along but guess theyre all the same. But gets there all the same. This case is a case about nothing. It is a case about nothing, and people are watching. It is not just these people. There are thousands upon thousands of people watching at home. They will sit in judgment, they have watched the evidence, and been shown what had been alleged and what has been proven and seen they dont match up. For me, as a son of a butcher, and to the son of a woman who worked in our high school cafeteria. Who had the gift from god to go to texas a m and going to the marine corps, and be able to become a lawyer, a member of the bar of our state. To be called to defend the sitting attorney general of the state of texas is a great honor. It is a great honor to stand in front of you. I know in the fiber of my being that all of this foolishness that they have accused him of is false. The only question i have in my mind is whether there is courage in this room to vote the way you know the evidence requires. I think there is. I hope there is. I pray there is. I am asking you to agree with the texans who put this man in office, to put this man back to work. And to vote not guilty. I had planned on 30 minutes but i have five. So i guess there really are no coincidences in austin. It may or may not surprise you that i am going to go in a different way from my colleague mr. Buzbee. Who is a fine lawyer. But i am not going to let to yell at you. I am not going to scream at you. I am not going to point my finger and shake my fists. I just think, first off, no offense, but your politician, yall can probably get that range quicker than most mammals. Rage quicker than most mammals. I am not going to attack my colleagues on the others. I do not think they are good lawyers, i think they are great lawyers, they are living legends. But heres the point about that. Some of the greatest lawyers in texas literally could not put together a cogent case that could convince anyone that these things occurred beyond a reasonable doubt. They are the best of the best, they did the best they could. But the evidence simply was not there. And my friends on the committee, here is a pro tip. If you are doing this investigation that will literally cost millions and millions of dollars, and take weeks and weeks out of our senators lives, one person you might have talked to, me. I have been representing ken paxton for eight years. Do you think they could have called me and said, we have a problem with paxton, what about this Kitchen Cabinet . I was literally i said i wasnt going to scream, i was literally having lunch with mr. Donnelly when this was going on. Do you think before we rode that check he could have said, lets talk. They did not do that. I am not the worlds greatest lawyer. But i am pretty easy to find. The fact today would not literally pick up the phone and call me . That is a clue that they were more invested in the conclusion that they wanted then they were invested in the investigation. 1. 5 minutes, i would make a joke about my personal life but i wont. I see the picture of brandon cammock. One of the things that is harder than it looks when you are a criminal defense lawyer, i need the picture. There we go. Thank you eric for everything. One of the things that is harder than it looks is trying to explained to a jury what reasonable doubt looks like. That is what reasonable doubt looks like in this case. One minute left. Mr. Cogdell this wasnt a baseless investigation, i respect david maxwell, but with respect to that legacy, his milk carton has instat has expired. When he says it is a crime to investigate whether or not something is a crime, come on. That is dumber than a bucket of hair. For a texas ranger to say it is a crime to investigate the legality by the way, that is how my friends and i make a living. But he said not a crime, i thought that was something there, and i was doing the best that i could. That is game set match, i think that is a phrase, i dont play tennis. It is game over. The whole case was around this illegal relationship with mr. Paul, and my friend ken paxton. You are going to have to wrap up. Mr. Cogdell let me just say this. It was an honor to be here. Thank you. But this is not about me. It is not about ken paxton. It is about whether or not we have a reasonable doubt. I suspect things he did things you did not like. I understand that, but that is not the issue. The issue is whether the proof is there that is so convincing that it convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt. This same standard as in a Death Penalty case. Its not. Its not. Two words, two words, not guilty, thank you. He went over about a minute, i will give you an additional minute. You have 51 minutes. Would you remove floor i will give you five minutes while they are taking down the stretch, but do not leave the chamber