The Texas Tribune is your source for in-depth reporting on the Ken Paxton impeachment trial. Readers make that possible. Support authoritative Texas journalism with a donation now.
On Thursday morning, Attorney General Ken Paxton, who recently regained his position, embarked on a series of appearances on conservative talk radio. During these interviews, Paxton shared fresh insights into his upcoming impeachment trial and expressed his political aspirations.
Paxton delved into several topics during his discussion, including the significant cost of the trial, which amounted to over $4 million. He also expressed his determination to actively participate in primary contests against House Republicans who supported his impeachment.
On Saturday, the Senate made the decision to acquit Paxton on all 16 articles of impeachment. These articles accused him of abuse of office and bribery. The outcome of this vote has intensified the ongoing GOP conflict in Texas, particularly between the Senate and House. It is worth noting that the House had previously voted overwhelmingly in May to impeach Paxton.
The morning following Paxton’s initial post-acquittal interview with Tucker Carlson, he appeared on radio interviews expressing how the acquittal had revitalized him.
These are the key moments from the radio interviews:
Trial cost
As Paxton criticized the House for utilizing taxpayer funds for their legal representation, he divulged the expenses incurred for his impeachment defense.
Paxton informed radio host Chris Salcedo that the entire expenditure amounted to more than $4 million. He also mentioned that his legal expenses alone exceeded $1 million.
However, echoing his previous statements, he emphasized that “not a single cent of taxpayer money” was used for it.
Paxton emphasized that he dedicated a significant amount of time to fundraising for his defense, explaining to Dallas radio host Mark Davis that this was the primary reason for his absence during most days of the trial. In his conversation with Davis, Paxton disclosed that the overall cost amounted to approximately $4.5 million, out of which he managed to raise nearly $3 million during the summer, marking a personal achievement.
Primary involvement
Davis inquired of Paxton whether he would be “proactively endorsing and providing financial backing for primary contests against individuals who have caused you distress” – to which Paxton responded with a resolute “certainly.”
Paxton expressed his high level of motivation as he stated, “I will dedicate a significant amount of time in Beaumont. Additionally, I will be investing considerable time in Kerrville and Collin County.”
House Speaker Dade Phelan hails from Beaumont, while Rep. Andrew Murr represents Kerrville, the city in his district where he chaired the House impeachment managers. Notably, Paxton’s home county, Collin County, witnessed all the Republican state representatives voting in favor of his impeachment.
Jeff Leach, who served as an impeachment manager, delivered a closing argument among the group of local representatives.
Paxton informed Davis, “Prepare yourself, Jeff Leach.”
Leach seemed to reply to Paxton on X, formerly referred to as Twitter, by sharing a popular video clip featuring high school football players enthusiastically chanting “we ready.”
The actual allegations
The radio interviewers displayed a lack of curiosity towards delving deeper into the specific allegations made during the trial, which implicated Paxton in the abuse of his office to benefit his associate and contributor, Nate Paul. In 2020, seven ex-high-ranking deputies expressed their apprehensions regarding the connection and reported them to the FBI.
However, Davis’s inquiry sparked Paxton to share his perspective on the matter, or at least a portion of it.
Paxton attributed the controversy to his decision of appointing Jeff Mateer as his chief deputy. Paxton claimed that he had no prior acquaintance with Mateer but hired him promptly following a disagreement with his former first assistant attorney general, now-U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Austin. According to Paxton, Mateer faced significant personal challenges after his unsuccessful nomination to the federal bench in 2017. As a result, Mateer started appointing deputies who were influenced by external forces that held a negative opinion of Paxton.
Paxton admitted, “I regret not giving it more consideration. It’s my responsibility since I should have recognized this.”
Paxton expressed that Paul’s claims as a real estate investor being targeted by a vast law enforcement conspiracy involving the FBI and Justice Department genuinely intrigued him. However, Paxton also mentioned that he lacked trust in these agencies. He felt compelled to uncover the truth but was unable to do so due to the interference of the whistleblowing deputies.
According to impeachment exhibits filed by prosecutors, forensic investigators from the attorney general’s office have investigated and disproven Paul’s allegation that search warrant records were tampered with following the 2019 raids on his residence and businesses.
A possible Cornyn challenge
Paxton has been widely considered as a possible primary opponent for U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, in 2026. During his conversation with Carlson, he expressed his willingness to consider all options.
Paxton elaborated on his thinking when speaking with Davis.
Paxton declared, “Regardless of whether it’s me or another person, his time is over. Currently, I don’t have any specific intention to go against Cornyn.”
Paxton stated that his current focus lies in serving as attorney general, although he did not completely dismiss the possibility of considering other options.
Cornyn has stood out among prominent Texas Republicans by consistently voicing apprehension regarding the whistleblower claims since their emergence. In fact, he openly admitted feeling “embarrassed” by Paxton’s scandals last year.
Angela Paxton’s recusal
Paxton emphasized his disagreement with a Senate trial rule that exempted his wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, allowing her to attend the trial but restricting her from voting or taking part in deliberations.
Paxton expressed disbelief to Davis, stating that they couldn’t believe it had been done and believed it to be wrong.
Paxton informed Salcedo that his wife possessed a constitutional privilege to advocate for her constituents by engaging in the trial.
Despite the circumstances, Angela Paxton dutifully showed up for every day of the trial. Throughout the proceedings, she patiently endured the testimony of a witness who provided extensive details about discovering an alleged extramarital affair involving Paxton.
Salcedo was informed by Ken Paxton that her spouse’s participation in the trial was deemed “heroic,” despite being unjustly deprived of her voting rights.
Following the trial, Angela Paxton, who had previously voted against the rule package, expressed her intention to vote in favor of acquitting her husband.
TLR’s influence
Paxton openly showed disdain towards various political adversaries, with particular emphasis on veteran GOP strategist Karl Rove and Texans for Lawsuit Reform, an organization that provided significant financial support to one of Paxton’s primary opponents in 2022. However, TLR has refuted any involvement in instigating Paxton’s impeachment.
Paxton informed Salcedo that the small collective consisting of TLR, Karl Rove, and the Bushes had unequivocally participated in the matter. According to Paxton, this faction has persistently sought to remove him from his position ever since he assumed office.
Paxton specifically accused TLR of having a hand in an op-ed from former Gov. Rick Perry that the Wall Street Journal published days before the trial. In that op-ed, Perry urged senators to proceed to a “full and fair hearing,” implying they should reject Paxton’s pretrial motions to dismiss.
The Tribune obtained an email on Aug. 17, in which Dick Trabulsi, a prominent leader in TLR, sent what seemed to be a draft of Perry’s op-ed to Rove. Trabulsi expressed his desire to discuss it with Rove and inquired if the Wall Street Journal would be interested in publishing it. The op-ed was eventually published one week later.
In response to the email inquiry, Lucy Nashed, spokesperson for TLR, stated that it verifies their stance, which has consistently advocated for senators to make their decision based solely on the evidence presented during a fair and comprehensive trial.
