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.
Without providing evidence, Ken Paxton, a Republican Attorney General, claimed on Wednesday that the Biden administration, in collaboration with specific Texas Republicans, was responsible for the unsuccessful endeavor to impeach him on allegations of bribery and corruption.
Following his acquittal by the Texas Senate on Saturday on 16 articles of impeachment, Paxton expressed his disapproval towards fellow conservatives whom he believed had betrayed him and the party. Among those he criticized were House Speaker Dade Phelan, former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, and the all-Republican Court of Criminal Appeals.
Paxton strongly criticized Cornyn, stating that he is not an effective representative for Texans. Paxton believes that in 2026, a strong candidate should challenge Cornyn, and he even expressed his own interest in potentially being that candidate. When Tucker Carlson suggested that Paxton should run, he responded by saying that he is considering all options. Paxton specifically pointed out Cornyn’s alleged failure to safeguard Texas from undocumented immigrants as a major concern.
Paxton expressed his disappointment, stating that he cannot recall any notable achievements made by him for our state or the country. Additionally, he highlighted the lack of response from him regarding the substantial influx into our state, emphasizing the absence of any legislative proposals that address this issue.
When asked for comment, Cornyn’s spokesperson referred to a response he had given to another reporter on Thursday regarding a possible challenge from Paxton. In his response, Cornyn stated that his current priorities lie in addressing various matters, such as urging President Biden to fulfill his duties concerning the border situation.
In the 47-minute interview shared on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Carlson and Paxton did not delve into the details of the impeachment case against the attorney general. Paxton expressed his belief that the impeachment was a form of retaliation for his lawsuits challenging the 2020 presidential election results in various states, as well as his lawsuits contesting Biden’s policies.
According to Paxton, “Our presence posed a significant challenge for the Biden administration, and this was their means of removing me from the equation.”
He observed that two lawyers who were part of the impeachment prosecution team had previously served in the federal Department of Justice while Biden was in office.
“They weren’t sent there by accident,” Paxton declared.
In May, the Texas House made the decision to impeach Paxton, claiming that the attorney general had been involved in numerous instances of misusing his position. These included assisting a friend, Austin real estate investor Nate Paul, in postponing foreclosures on his properties, conducting investigations and harassment against adversaries, as well as obtaining confidential information about the police inquiries concerning him. Additionally, they accused Paul of offering employment to Paxton’s romantic partner and covering the expenses for renovating the attorney general’s residence in Austin.
Paxton expressed his eagerness to address the matter during the summer. However, he highlighted that a trial gag order enforced by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick prevented him from doing so. Paxton accused House impeachment managers of breaching the order by leaking detrimental information to journalists, leaving him unable to respond. Furthermore, he alleged that they had been in communication with Rove, who had published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal foretelling Paxton’s conviction.
Paxton concurred with Carlson’s portrayal of Rove, who played a significant role in Bush’s political campaigns, as an “activist liberal effectively serving the Biden administration.” Paxton claimed that Rove’s impact on Texas politics has waned. Furthermore, he accused Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC, a group that contributes to lawmakers, of being implicated in covert efforts to impeach him. This argument was frequently presented by his defense attorneys throughout the trial.
Lucy Nashed, a spokesperson for the group, stated that they were unaware of the House investigation of Ken Paxton until the public was informed. Similarly, they did not have prior knowledge of the House articles of impeachment and were bound by the Senate’s gag order during the trial in the Senate.
Paxton expressed his discontent with the unfairness of being suspended from office due to impeachment without having an opportunity to defend himself. He voiced his support for Patrick’s proposal to amend the state constitution in order to establish a more challenging process for impeachment and removal from office.
Requests for comment were left unanswered by both Rove and the House impeachment managers.
Paxton ridiculed the House impeachment proceedings, criticizing its rushed and flawed nature. The process unfolded publicly within a week towards the end of the legislative session. He alleged that the House Committee on General Investigating, which initiated a secret investigation into the attorney general in March, withheld information about the probe from one of its three Republican members until May.
Phelan was accused by Paxton of presiding over the House while intoxicated earlier this year, a claim Paxton initially made when the investigative committee revealed that Phelan was being investigated. During a late-night session, Carlson aired a widely circulated video clip showing the speaker struggling to articulate his words, and insinuated that Phelan may have an alcohol dependency. Phelan’s spokesperson chose not to provide any comment on the matter.
Paxton’s criticism of the Court of Criminal Appeals was rooted in the justices’ ruling last year that the attorney general cannot unilaterally prosecute voter fraud, one of his top priorities. Instead, the agency can do so only at the request of local district attorneys.
Paxton stated that voter fraud, which we had ample evidence of, was successfully prosecuted in the past. However, he expressed disappointment in the current absence of any efforts to prosecute instances of voter fraud.
There is no evidence of widespread election fraud in Texas, though election integrity has been a priority of many Republican elected officials. An audit of the 2020 election in four of the largest counties confirmed the election was secure.
After the trial concluded, Paxton expressed his enthusiasm to resume work. He stated, “I am filled with renewed energy to fulfill the tasks entrusted to me by the voters.”
