Paul had sent a list of targets to Cammack, via his lawyer, who he wanted to see investigated and subpoenaed in what he called "Operation Deep Sea." He alleged he was the target of two massive yet separate conspiracies perpetrated by business rivals, judges and several law enforcement agencies, including agents that participated in an FBI-led raid on his home and business a year earlier. Cammack persuaded a judge to approve 25 additional subpoenas, which sought email or phone records of prosecutors investigating Paul, federal court staff, police officers, the head of a charity who sued him, a court-appointed lawyer in that lawsuit and the lawyer's wife. All of those targets were on Paul's list. And the investigation would never have happened without the support of Paxton. The hiring of Cammack is a key charge in the Texas House's impeachment case against Paxton, a third-term Republican, who is accused of misusing his office to help Paul in return for free home renovations and the investor's help covering up the attorney general's extramarital affair. [...]
Emails, meeting transcripts, invoices and court records obtained by The Texas Tribune or released by the House impeachment managers shed new light on just how closely Paul and his attorney worked with Cammack to direct the investigation. For example, at one point Cammack drafted a search warrant affidavit that was nearly verbatim from a document Paul wrote. Records also show that Cammack, who was handpicked by Paul, was working in secret, without the knowledge of Paxton's top deputies.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/08/29/ken-paxton-nate-paul-brandon-cammack-impeachment/
The use of operation names is a nice touch.

etxag02 said:

---

Paul had sent a list of targets to Cammack, via his lawyer, who he wanted to see investigated and subpoenaed in what he called "Operation Deep Sea." He alleged he was the target of two massive yet separate conspiracies perpetrated by business rivals, judges and several law enforcement agencies, including agents that participated in an FBI-led raid on his home and business a year earlier. Cammack persuaded a judge to approve 25 additional subpoenas, which sought email or phone records of prosecutors investigating Paul, federal court staff, police officers, the head of a charity who sued him, a court-appointed lawyer in that lawsuit and the lawyer's wife. All of those targets were on Paul's list. And the investigation would never have happened without the support of Paxton. The hiring of Cammack is a key charge in the Texas House's impeachment case against Paxton, a third-term Republican, who is accused of misusing his office to help Paul in return for free home renovations and the investor's help covering up the attorney general's extramarital affair. [...]
Emails, meeting transcripts, invoices and court records obtained by The Texas Tribune or released by the House impeachment managers shed new light on just how closely Paul and his attorney worked with Cammack to direct the investigation. For example, at one point Cammack drafted a search warrant affidavit that was nearly verbatim from a document Paul wrote. Records also show that Cammack, who was handpicked by Paul, was working in secret, without the knowledge of Paxton's top deputies.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/08/29/ken-paxton-nate-paul-brandon-cammack-impeachment/
The use of operation names is a nice touch.

---

This can't be. Ken Paxton is as pure as driven snow and this whole thing is a liberal witch hunt.

Yet Still better than Garza or Nelson.

Would still take Paxton all day, everyday over any Democrat.

That said, since this is from the Texas Tribune, it should not be assumed to be accurate or true. The TT is nothing but a leftist propaganda outlet posing as a news outlet.

Rapier108 said:

---

Would still take Paxton all day, everyday over any Democrat.

That said, since this is from the Texas Tribune, it should not be assumed to be accurate or true. The TT is nothing but a leftist propaganda outlet posing as a news outlet.

---

Agreed. Author is a lib from NY who writes for the liberal TX Tribune and who also tweeted this.

Anyone that claims to be a "dog dad" or "cat mom" obviously is a leftist. I except kids to talk like this, not full grown adults.

Now do Biden & minions!

Moron doesn't know the difference between a battle rifle and an assault rifle or the fact that the rifle in the picture is neither.

So, basically Joe Biden with an R behind his name

BMX Bandit said:

---

Yet Still better than Garza or Nelson.

---

But not better than Guzman, who should have won and would have won if we were privy to all this BS about Paxton ahead of the election. All of this info, despite the fact that its from the Tribune, is on the record. Read the house documents. Paxton abused his office to help Nate Paul. Why he would do this and ruin his career is beyond me.

Are we talkin'' Uncle Nate?

Charpie said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Yet Still better than Garza or Nelson.

---

But not better than Guzman, who should have won and would have won if we were privy to all this BS about Paxton ahead of the election. All of this info, despite the fact that its from the Tribune, is on the record. Read the house documents. Paxton abused his office to help Nate Paul. Why he would do this and ruin his career is beyond me.

---

Still take him over any Democrats as long as he fights and grinds them to dust.

etxag02 said:

---

Paul had sent a list of targets to Cammack, via his lawyer, who he wanted to see investigated and subpoenaed in what he called "Operation Deep Sea." He alleged he was the target of two massive yet separate conspiracies perpetrated by business rivals, judges and several law enforcement agencies, including agents that participated in an FBI-led raid on his home and business a year earlier. Cammack persuaded a judge to approve 25 additional subpoenas, which sought email or phone records of prosecutors investigating Paul, federal court staff, police officers, the head of a charity who sued him, a court-appointed lawyer in that lawsuit and the lawyer's wife. All of those targets were on Paul's list. And the investigation would never have happened without the support of Paxton. The hiring of Cammack is a key charge in the Texas House's impeachment case against Paxton, a third-term Republican, who is accused of misusing his office to help Paul in return for free home renovations and the investor's help covering up the attorney general's extramarital affair. [...]
Emails, meeting transcripts, invoices and court records obtained by The Texas Tribune or released by the House impeachment managers shed new light on just how closely Paul and his attorney worked with Cammack to direct the investigation. For example, at one point Cammack drafted a search warrant affidavit that was nearly verbatim from a document Paul wrote. Records also show that Cammack, who was handpicked by Paul, was working in secret, without the knowledge of Paxton's top deputies.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/08/29/ken-paxton-nate-paul-brandon-cammack-impeachment/
The use of operation names is a nice touch.

---

texastribune? LOL, please stop

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

Team politics. That's why.
"He may be a crook, but he's our crook!"

Rapier108 said:

---

Would still take Paxton all day, everyday over any Democrat.

That said, since this is from the Texas Tribune, it should not be assumed to be accurate or true. The TT is nothing but a leftist propaganda outlet posing as a news outlet.

---

Yes, and Texas Tribune got it from the documents filed in Kenny's impeachment case. But sure, blame the messenger.

I was in Hilton Head last week playing golf with 2 people who work in the capitol. These are NOT 2 elected officials.

Word around the capitol is the evidence will be so salacious that even the Rs in the Senate will vote to remove him from office.

SW AG80 said:

---

I was in Hilton Head last week playing golf with 2 people who work in the capitol. These are NOT 2 elected officials.

Word around the capitol is the evidence will be so salacious that even the Rs in the Senate will vote to remove him from office.

---

And again what did these clowns do in Texas to help Harris County which screwed Republican voters? Nothing but they are glad they got the Republican Texas AG.

All they have done is help Democrats.

And lastly we don't need to wait for evidence to see Drunk Dade. We have all seen it already. Yet they have not called for him to resign. Nope they all fell in line with Dade for Paxtons impeachment. Minus 20 plus Republicans.

I've followed the Nate Paul saga for years before any of this all came out. This is completely believable from that angle. Dude is a major league creepy and dirty.

Be a lot cooler if he investigated paragraphs

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

Articles of impeachment only need a simple majority to be sent to the Senate. They did not need the Dems support to pass.

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

Articles of impeachment only need a simple majority to be sent to the Senate. They did not need the Dems support to pass.

---

Actually since 23 Republicans voted against it Dade did need Democrats to get the vote needed.

It passed only with Democrat support. Full support with 61 Democrat votes for it. There were only 60 Republican votes for it. .

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

Articles of impeachment only need a simple majority to be sent to the Senate. They did not need the Dems support to pass.

---

Actually since 23 Republicans voted against it Dade did need Democrats to get the vote needed.

It passed only with Democrat support. Full support with 61 Democrat votes for it. There were only 60 Republican votes for it. .

---

You are right my math was wrong. But still it does not look good for Paxton when over 60% of your own party voting for it.

If the Dems didn't lie so much and call it "journalism", the default position of the right wouldn't be to immediately dismiss everything they say...

But...here we are.

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

Articles of impeachment only need a simple majority to be sent to the Senate. They did not need the Dems support to pass.

---

Actually since 23 Republicans voted against it Dade did need Democrats to get the vote needed.

It passed only with Democrat support. Full support with 61 Democrat votes for it. There were only 60 Republican votes for it. .

---

You are right my math was wrong. But still it does not look good for Paxton when over 60% of your own party voting for it.

---

On the surface yes but these are Texas state republicans.
Lead by a Drunk House Speaker that lets Democrats lead committees over republicans.

They would have credibility had they made that vote and the same who voted for it also called for Dade to resign. But they didn't because this was political.

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

Articles of impeachment only need a simple majority to be sent to the Senate. They did not need the Dems support to pass.

---

Actually since 23 Republicans voted against it Dade did need Democrats to get the vote needed.

It passed only with Democrat support. Full support with 61 Democrat votes for it. There were only 60 Republican votes for it. .

---

You are right my math was wrong. But still it does not look good for Paxton when over 60% of your own party voting for it.

---

On the surface yes but these are Texas state republicans.
Lead by a Drunk House Speaker that lets Democrats lead committees over republicans.

They would have credibility had they made that vote and the same who voted for it also called for Dade to resign. But they didn't because this was political.

---

I hope you do know that Dan Patrick lets Dems run Senate committees too. It has always happened. When Dems controlled both houses they let R's run committees. Just don't get the love for a crook like Paxton. As a lifelong conservative Republican it baffles me that so many in our party are taking up for someone that acts criminally like a Dem.

AGHouston11 said:

---

Aggie97 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Charpie said:

---

Why are we bringing up the dems? Who cares? That isn't even a question here

---

First he was only impeached with the help of Drunk Dades democrats. He couldn't have done it with Republicans only.
Impeaching Paxton only helped the democrats.

Second the same bunch of idiots wouldn't pass a bill to allow the Texas AG to go after Harris County election fraud.

Things that actually matter

---

You do know over 60% of Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.

---

Or that only 60% Republicans voted for it meaning it was only with Democrats help Dade was able to do it. He couldn't do it without Democrats. He didn't have enough Republican support.

Meanwhile those same Republicans who voted for it never called for Drunk Dade to resign. So they need to spare us the importance of integrity in office BS.

---

A drunk House Speaker is sober the next day. The loss of integrity of the TAG office and a very corrupt AG can linger on for decades.

Texas Republicans did exactly what on Harris County Elections and the BS? It's not about love or no love for Paxton.
It's about doing their job for voters. In this case a major win for Democrats.

As far as love it's hard to believe that Texas House Republicans love Dade so much. Why didn't they call for him to resign.
Most people understand that if you show up totally drunk at work you get sent home.

It is team tribal politics run amok.

The very same people on this board who rightfully criticize the Feds for weaponization of the process are defending Ken Paxton when he does the same thing. It's ridiculous.

The dude took bribes to use the power of the state to investigate and harass the enemies of his friend and donor. Get him the F out of office.

But no, ermagerd he's a Republican. Let's give him a medal and change the subject.

kag00 said:

---

I've followed the Nate Paul saga for years before any of this all came out. This is completely believable from that angle. Dude is a major league creepy and dirty.

---

So is Paxton. Dude has to go.

Slicer97 said:

---

Moron doesn't know the difference between a battle rifle and an assault rifle or the fact that the rifle in the picture is neither.

---

That is a direct quote from the article, taken from an officers's body cam footage.

Well then, that officer is a moron who doesn't know the difference between a battle rifle and an assault rifle or the fact that the rifle in the picture is neither.