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.
Opposing sides in Ken Paxton’s impeachment trial lashed out in the moments after senators voted Saturday to send the embattled attorney general back to his job.
Defense attorney Dan Cogdell expressed his disbelief and disdain towards the bipartisan House-led impeachment, calling it a joke and a sham. He firmly believed that this unfortunate event should never have taken place.
The House impeachment managers, who spearheaded the campaign to remove Paxton from office, held a contrasting press conference at the Capitol, expressing their disagreement and asserting that the vote to acquit was the action that warranted criticism.
“Managers presented overwhelming evidence that Ken Paxton is the most corrupt politician in the state of Texas at this time,” said Rep. Ann Johnson, a Houston Democrat and vice chair of the House team. “And the Republicans in the Texas Senate just returned him to the office of top cop.”
Prior to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s gag order in mid-July, both sides engaged in a heated exchange of allegations including corruption, political manipulation, and intentional confusion.
Freed of the gag order Saturday, the barbs continued — even as the impeachment managers claimed a measure of vindication despite losing every vote on 16 articles of impeachment.
Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, said there was always a “challenging threshold” to meet in what was ultimately a political trial, but he added that the case brought important evidence “into the sunlight” and raised significant questions about Paxton’s fitness for the job.
Murr stated that the trial provided a precise and coherent portrayal of an attorney general who was in complete disregard of his conservative lawyers’ urgent cautions, despite them being entrusted to assist in managing his office. Murr questioned why Mr. Paxton persistently prioritized the interests of Nate Paul over the concerns expressed by his most reliable advisors, without offering any explanation.
In light of our limited knowledge about the accusations we were defending, Paxton’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, commended the team for their extraordinary dedication, referring to their efforts as a Herculean task. He also expressed gratitude towards the senators for conducting what he perceived as a just trial.
Buzbee expressed his pride in the case presented, stating that it was unfortunate to have to prove their innocence. However, they successfully did so and firmly believe that the court’s verdict was just.
Johnson, on the House side, expressed doubt that the trial was fair, given how Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick — who presided as judge — bashed the entire process in a post-trial speech from the Senate dais.
According to her, Patrick appeared to have notes ready to criticize the members of the House and the House process.
Murr strongly criticized the substantial financial resources that Mr. Paxton’s supporters have utilized to manipulate and coerce both Texas senators and constituents.
However, Cogdell clarified that while Paxton was compensating the defense team, the prosecution team was receiving payment from state funds. “The individuals benefiting financially from the state are the prosecutors, not us,” he emphasized.
When asked whether the checks were sourced from Paxton’s campaign or his personal finances, Cogdell refused to disclose, despite growing speculation due to Paxton’s campaign donation appeals during the trial, where he mentioned that the funds would aid his return to office “by the end of the month.” Cogdell stated that he does not question the origin of checks when they are given to him, as it goes against his nature.
The Texas Tribune Festival is almost here! Join us Sept. 21-23 in downtown Austin for 125+ unforgettable conversations featuring nearly 300 speakers. Be there for Texas’ biggest politics and policy event when you buy your tickets today.
