Ken Paxton backers’ latest shameless defense: He was a hero for taking on the FBI | Opinion
READ MORE
The saga of Ken Paxton: Our Opinion coverage
Our Editorial Board has closely followed the saga of Attorney General Ken Paxton. Read our coverage to catch up on the issues in his impeachment, and check out our analysis as the trial unfolds.
Expand All
An emerging theme among staunch conservatives defending Ken Paxton as his impeachment trial unfolds is that the FBI and perhaps other law enforcement agencies were performing a targeted witch hunt and that Paxton was determined to stand up to such corruption.
Texas Republican Party Chairman Matt Rinaldi suggested as much on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.
“So this case is really shaping up to be about Paxton being willing to break established norms to investigate an out of control FBI, and his employees thinking it was “insane” for a state to challenge federal officers and speculating as to ulterior motives,” Rinaldi wrote.
It’s safe to say that there’s a segment of Republicans in Texas and elsewhere who agree with him. It follows in line with MAGA groupthink that believes Donald Trump would still be president were it not for the corrupt government.
First, Paxton defenders were denying that Paxton had done anything wrong. Now they’re doubling down and saying that what Paxton did was noble, defiant, and for a good cause: He’s defying norms and trying to tear down corrupt agencies! It must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-hero.
Paxton is a lot of things — a decent lawyer, a charismatic politician, a Trump ally — but a noble and decent man he is not. Even conservatives who might like him and voted for him surely can see this now.
The litany of people who have testified against Paxton so far have said as much. Most of Monday, the fifth day of the Senate trial, was dominated by the testimony of Mark Penley, the deputy attorney general for criminal prosecution in 2019-20, and a former federal prosecutor for many years before. He is among the group of former staffers who sued the agency and was fired after reporting Paxton to the FBI over concerns that he was abusing the office to help donor Nate Paul.
Paul, the key person named in the case besides Paxton, was mentioned more than he has been so far Monday. Paxton involved Penley with Paul after Paul came to the belief that the FBI had changed documents to allow a raid on his home in 2019, Penley said.
“I thought, Why is the attorney general involved in this?’ ” Penley said. “This is not a state matter from what I could tell and I thought it was very suspicious that someone who was a target of a federal investigation was reaching out to the attorney general for legal help.”
Penley testified that about a month later, Paxton had talked to him about Paul’s case about five times.
The prosecution has done a sufficient job showing that Paxton seemed willing to bend over backwards for Paul, especially if it helped him stick it to the FBI. But there’s two things missing and it’ll be interesting to see if the prosecution fills in these gaps.
We still don’t know why Paxton and Paul formed this indomitable duo against these institutions. Is it because Paul knew about Paxton’s extramarital affair and Paxton was afraid he’d squeal? Was Paul giving Paxton other favors that Paxton needed to keep secret? It’s just not clear what would drive a man who so loves being in public office to risk it for this real estate investor who seems shady at best, unethical at worst.
The prosecution also still needs to explain what Paxton got to demonstrate some kind of bribery. Was it the job given to Paxton’s girlfriend? Expensive countertops that have made news? A measly campaign donation of $25,000?
Paxton is alleged to have prodded his staff to conduct unusual investigations, against their judgment — but to what end? What did Paxton, a person who wouldn’t rub your back if you didn’t promise to rub his, gain?
This story was originally published September 12, 2023 at 5:32 AM.
.JPG)
