(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Summarization of the Case Against Paxton [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2023-09-14

Below is a summary of the testimony presented by the House Managers/Prosecution. Apologize if previous posts have been somewhat fragmented. It has been a strain to follow all of the moving parts while juggling other things. Gratitude for The Texas Tribune, which pays its journalists to cover the proceedings and fill in the gaps that I had to miss. Also want to credit a friend in Austin who has been graciously providing supplemental notes.

Lt. Governor Dan Patrick is the presiding officer as President of the Senate. Patrick will not be voting, nor will Paxton’s wife, Senator Angela Paxton. The main attorney on the House side is Rusty Hardin, although Dick DeGuerin, Erin Epley and other attorneys were assisting. The main attorney on Paxton’s side during the House’s case is Tony Buzbee, with Dan Cogdell and J. Mitchell Little assisting.

The Whistleblowers

These are the four former employees who are often referred to as the “Whistleblowers.” They are also part of a group of 7 employees who visited the FBI in late September of 2020 to report their concerns about Paxton’s activities (which all of them agreed were unethical and most likely illegal). At the beginning of each witness’ testimony, Rusty Hardin established that all of them were conservatives and shared Paxton’s policy agenda. Indeed a few of them are probably even more far-right than Paxton. They all testified to being active and devout Christians. All of them testified to efforts to dissuade Paxton from being involved with Nate Paul to both “protect Paxton from himself” and the AG’s office.

Who is Nate Paul? Paul is an Austin-based real estate investor/developer. Paul’s personality seems to mirror that of another well-known New York real estate investor—entitled, demanding, and willing to bully officials to get his way. Also like his well-known New York counterpart, Paul is currently facing felony indictments for making false financial statements.

Mark Penley. Penley first met Paxton while they both worked at a private law firm. He also knew Paxton during the year or two they both attended Stonebriar church in Frisco. Penley had spent 17 years as a U.S. Attorney working in “security and terrorism” cases prior to being hired by the AG in 2019. Penley first became aware of Nate Paul when Paxton asked him to meet at a coffee shop and make a phone call from inside their vehicle. Paxton told Penley they were calling a “friend who had search warrants executed.” Penley said he was already seeing a “red flag” and wondering why the AG was getting involved in this.

The next time Penley heard the name Nate Paul was when a referral had come over from the Travis County District Attorney. Most of the Deputies in the meeting were in agreement that the case was meritless or even “crazy.” Paul had concocted some kind of “grand conspiracy” involving a federal magistrate, the US Attorney/DOJ, the FBI and DPS. Because Paul was alleging that the search warrant had been “altered,” Penley did OK some kind of tech review of metadata, and they found “no evidence of criminal alternation.” They explained this to Paxton, who instructed Penley to “meet with Paul and explain this to him.”

At the meeting where Penley and Maxwell met with Paul and his attorney to explain that they were closing the investigation, Paxton and Paul both became angry. Penley was surprised that Paxton had “done a 180” about closing the investigation. “Nate Paul acted like we didn’t understand who was the real boss here.” Due to pressure from Paxton, Penley agreed to continue the investigation, and here he testifies to multiple futile requests to get documents from Paul.

Penley’s testimony (as did all of the whistleblowers’ testimony) corroborated the stories about the Brandon Cammack “contract.” When Penley did not approve the contract, he thought that was the end of it. Until Penley received a phone call from Paxton on September 24th. Paxton said he was “calling from the White House” and demanded Penley approve the contract. Penley told Paxton this was a line he would not cross.

On September 26th, Paxton asked Penley to meet him at a Panera Bread, but the conversation moved to an outside table at a nearby Dunkin Donuts. At this meeting, Penley had the feeling that his job was in serious jeopardy. Penley and Mateer both warned Paxton that this investigation was dangerous and could expose Paxton to media scandal or even charges of bribery. Paxton told them that if they would not supervise Cammack, he would do so himself.

Another issue that came up was that Cammack had not been paid. Here, Paxton complained that he had “paid $50,000 on my personal lawsuit” and “you don’t know what it’s like to be the target of an investigation,” followed by disparaging comments about DPS (which provides Paxton’s security detail) being “corrupt.” This was the event that prompted Penley (along with six others) to report Paxton to the FBI

Ryan Vassar. Vassar was hired as Paxton’s Chief of General Counsel and promoted to Deputy in April 2020. Details of Vassar’s testimony can be found here.

David Maxwell. Maxwell served 25 years as a Texas Ranger before joining the AG in 2011 under (now Governor) Greg Abbott. In 2020, Maxwell had been promoted to Director of Law Enforcement, which was equal in rank to the Deputies. Just before Maxwell came in to testify, Dick DeGuerin asked Patrick to “not require that I control the witness,” which seemed strange at the time. However, Maxwell’s cross-examination was probably the most “hostile,” as Maxwell seemed to be intentionally attempting to thwart and frustrate Buzbee. Details of Maxwell’s testimony can be found here.

James “Blake” Brickman. Like with the other whistleblowers, Rusty Hardin established Brickman’s conservative bona-fides through previous employment with former Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear and former Senator Jim Bunning. Brickman even had a book with him that Paxton had given him—a book that was written by former Supreme Court Justice Scalia and inscribed with Paxton’s “kudos” for Brickman’s service.

Brickman interviewed with Paxton in late 2019, and was hired in early 2020. Sometime in March or April, Drew Wicker (Paxton’s personal assistant) came to him with concerns he had regarding Paxton’s personal meetings with Nate Paul, many which were not on the calendar or accompanied by Paxton’s security detail. According to Brickman, Wicker was concerned that Paxton might be “breaking the law.”

Brickman was in agreement with Paxton’s 7 senior Deputies who had been fired. He testified about a meeting with Brent Webster on October 5th, where Webster “threw him out” with the assistance of an armed female security guard. Brickman was terminated on October 20th.

Brickman testified that a letter Paxton submitted in response to a House oversight committee is “full of lies” and “never addresses the questions.” Not addressing the questions sounds a lot like Paxton and Webster’s responses to their bar complaints.

Another analogy to the bar complaints is Paxton’s tactic of tying up litigation with “Plea to the Jurisdiction” filings. Brickman alleges that this was deliberately intended to forestall discovery until after Paxton’s re-election. Paxton “lied to the public for 2 years about the case.”

Although Brickman is part of the “whistleblower” lawsuit, he is not part of the settlement that got scuttled by the House Committee. For him, it was more about (1) requiring Paxton to apologize, along with a public statement that the former employees did nothing wrong and were doing what they though was right; (2) not challenging a ruling from the TX Third Court of Appeals that the whistleblower law applies for the benefit of future public servants; and (3) remove the false and disparaging statement from the AGs web site, along with the AGs report “full of lies and omissions exonerating itself.”

Brickman says he is not interested in money and did not withhold agreement to settlement to squeeze a higher dollar amount. His goal is justice and vindication.

Darren McCarty. McCarty is considered to be one of the whistleblowers because he was part of the group that went to the FBI with concerns about Paxton, but he is not party to the whistleblower lawsuit. McCarty agreed to involve the AGs office in the Mitte Foundation litigation based on Paxton’s representations, although he would not do so knowing what he knows now. At some point, McCarty became “alarmed” at Paxton’s “urgency and anxiety” involved with the case, along with Paul’s constant demands and complaints.

When Paxton asked him to appear in a Travis County court involving the Mitte Foundation lawsuit, McCarty refused to do so. Paxton said he would go himself, which McCarty had to talk him out of because “Paxton never appears in court” and it would look too strange. McCarty finally “connected the dots” when he found out about Cammack’s grand jury subpoenas. In his opinion, Paxton had turned over the AGs office to a private citizen. Tribune story here.

Attorney General Former Staff

Jeff Mateer. Mateer was Paxton’s former First Assistant. Details of Mateer’s testimony can be found here. Mateer voluntarily left the AG on October 2, so he is not part of the whistleblower suit. Mateer was replaced by Brent Webster, who fired the whistleblowers about a month later.

Ryan Bangert. Bangert is Paxton’s former Deputy for legal Counsel. Details of Bangert’s testimony can be found here.

Katherine Minter “Missy” Cary. Cary is the daughter of an attorney who worked at the AGs office from 1965 to 1971 and bring her in on take-your-daughter-to-work days. Her father inspired her to attend St. Mary’s Law School, followed by a long career in various state agencies. In the Spring of 2018, Cary overheard a conversation while at lunch where an unknown women seemed to know a “lot of personal information” about Paxton. Cary was concerned and raised the issue with Paxton, who told her the woman was a realtor helping the Paxton’s sell their condo. When she saw the same woman with Paxton at an AG event, she confronted him again.

Paxton admitted to the affair in front of his Deputies and his wife, Senator Angela Paxton. Cary testified that her “heart broke” for Mrs. Paxton, and several folks were crying. At that time, Cary believed this would end it. However, months later, Paxton told her the affair was continuing because he was “in love” with Olson. Cary testified that her main concern wasn’t so much Paxton’s extracurricular activities as it was about the negative effect all the secrecy and sneaking around was having on the AG staff. Great coverage from the Tribune on this here.

Drew Wicker. Wicker served as Paxton’s personal aide and was close to both Paxton and his wife, Angela. Wicker testified that Paxton was “frugal” and not prone to overspending. Like Cammack, Wicker is a witness who seemed to be liked and had a good relationship with both sides.

He became increasingly concerned about Paxton’s relationship with Nate Paul, and multiple times overheard one of the contractors working on the Paxton’s home that they had to “check with Nate” about additional work. Wicker also ran into Paxton (not part of work) coming out of an Omni Hotel in Barton Creek with a woman later identified as Laura Olson. Although Wicker genuinely had the impression that Paul was somehow involved with the renovations to the Paxton home, he could not prove it. Wicker questioned Paxton about this, and Paxton told him there was “nothing to it.”

Wicker also could not confirm reports about the Paxtons having granite countertops installed. Buzbee attempted to introduce a slew of photos purportedly taken by Angela Paxton and supported by an affidavit. There was a long period of objections and bench consults due to a previous rule against allowing any Senator (who are also serving as jurors) to testify. Although I think Patrick’s rulings have been impartial (and even mostly correct), think he was a little too lenient on this one. Think it was more about concern for Angela than bias in favor of Paxton. Also don’t think there is any harm from this, since there doesn’t seem to be sufficient evidence to “prove” bribery from anywhere.

Wicker also testified to delivering a manila envelope to Paul (at Paxton’s direction) without knowing its contents. Contrary to rumor, the envelope was delivered in the light of day and not the “dark of night in a back alley.” (This seems to have come from Maxwell, who may be prone to hyperbole).

Wicker seems to flip flop between taking Paxtons word that nothing was amiss and uneasiness. Wicker did not seem evasive or untruthful, more like he was genuinely conflicted. There was evidence that Paxton was deliberately attempting to be secretive: Paxton had four cell phones, including two that were “extra.” Even with this many phones, Paxton would occasionally asked Wicker to use his phone. Wicker never knew who Paxton called when he used Wicker’s phone because the phone call log would be “wiped. Tribune story here.

Non-AG Witnesses

Brandon Cammack, Paxton’s unwitting “Special Counsel.” Cammack is the “outside counsel” that Paxton hired to “investigate” the feds who had searched Nate Paul’s business. Apparently, one of the agents had also been involved in the federal search which kicked off Paxton’s own pending felony indictment, which suggests there might be some element of revenge. One can imagine Paxton getting information like home addresses of his (and Paul’s) enemies in order to “dox” and send their supporters to terrorize them. Because…that is what these people do.

We can genuinely sympathize with Cammack. Indeed, he appears to have a good relationship with both sides. While testifying for the House, a number of times Buzbee made noises asking if Cammack was “OK for water,” sending the message that “this guy is on our side.” The House Managers established that Cammack was not some greenhorn straight out of law school, but had 5 years experience in criminal defense, conducting a number of trials and appeals. Cammack admitted that he had no experience on the prosecution side.

Cammack received a phone call from Paul’s attorney Michael Wynne on his birthday. He had known Wynne from their mutual membership in the Rotary as well as Wynne being a former chair of the Houston Bar. Wynne told him Paxton was looking to hire a “special prosecutor” and he had put his name in for consideration. Cammack said he was “excited” about the prospect of working for the AG. He met with Paxton around August 23. At that time, he was introduced to Mateer, who was “polite, but disengaged.” This was consistent with what Paxton told him later about his own staff “not wanting to work on it.” Cammack was hopeful that he might be trying a case, but when he received the contract (email), he saw that his duties would involve an investigation and report.

When Cammack first got a phone call from Paxton, he did not recognize the number. At some point, Paxton instructed him to download the Signal app (which encrypted information) and send email communications to a non-government email. Cammack testified that he had to obtain a separate phone in order to take Paxton’s calls. He did not really pay attention to this because of his ongoing frustrations with obtaining information and official certification.

Cammack describes his first meeting with Wynne and Paul. Although Cammack made no initial determination, he did think the claims merited investigation. “If this is true, it is serious.” It is likely that Wynne and Paul may have toned down some of the “crazy” by now—having had their claims rejected by Travis County and Paxton’s Deputies. Throughout the process, Cammack was repeatedly assured he would be meeting with Penley to “get the file”—which never happened. He also describes futile attempts to get information and “credentials” so he could be authorized to work—which also never happened.

At some point (Cammack said this was his idea) it was decided to issue subpoenas to get information for the investigation. Paxton was on board with this. Cammack testified that all of his communications went through Paxton, although Wynne sent him a contact at the Travis County DA. Cammack said Wynne assisted him with preparing the subpoenas. When he attempted to serve some of the subpoenas by email, some of the recipients (e.g., Microsoft) said they wanted a government address.

Cammack started serving the subpoenas around September 25th. About 30 or 40 were sent by email. There was a second “round”—associated with a “second referral” that had to be personally served on financial institutions. Wynne (Paul’s attorney) went with Cammack to serve the subpoenas, which (according to other witnesses) is a legal violation. Cammack testified that he “felt pressured” to allow Wynne to come along. Apparently unbeknownst to Cammack the second round of subpoenas involved Nate Paul’s litigation with the Mitte foundation and not the search of Paul’s business.

The next thing he knows, Cammack is being visited by U.S. Marshalls. Around the same time, he received a cease and desist order from Mark Penley. By now, he has made several trips to Austin and has not been paid. Cammack described a meeting he had with Paul, Wynne and Paxton, where Paxton assured him he had the authority to keep working because Penley had “no authority” to ask him to stop. At this point, Cammack said he didn’t do anything more because there were already too many red flags.

A couple of days later, Cammack met with Paxton and Brent Webster (who had now taken over Mateer’s position). Webster and Paxton told him “Let’s not meet here,” and took him to a Starbucks, which Cammack said seemed “uncomfortable and unprofessional.” At this time, Webster informed Cammack that his contract was “no good” and he would have to “eat” the $14,000 of services he had already billed for. Paxton and Webster left him there, and he had to ask for a ride to get back to his car.

Tribune article here.

Here, Paxton’s attorneys had a valid point. As a defense attorney, Cammack would not have the same automatic trust and deference to law enforcement as prosecutors would. It is a real cultural and worldview difference. There are good reasons for defense attorneys to maintain a healthy skepticism of law enforcement, and this type of thinking was likely helpful for furthering Paxton’s scheme.

Margaret Moore, Travis County District Attorney and Mindy Montford, Travis County DA employee. Employees at the Travis County DA echoed the AG Deputies analysis of Nate Paul’s complaints. At that time, Paul was alleging more than just an alteration in a search warrant, but a wide-ranging conspiracy among federal and state law enforcement agencies. Their office made some efforts to accommodate Paul in sending referrals due to pre-existing relationships. But no one in Travis County took the Paul allegations seriously. Moore also testified that there was “no such thing as a Special Prosecutor” for the AG and Cammack was never legally authorized to prosecute in Travis County. She also testified that the AG (Paxton) made no attempt to correct untrue testimony in front of the House Finance Committee (a potential new perjury crime). Tribune story here.

Ray Chester, Attorney for Mitte Foundation. Chester began by clearing up Paxton’s misleading propaganda that the Foundation was subject to an AG investigation. It seems that the Mitte Foundation had been in some trouble while Abbott was AG, but they had since changed their board and other high-level personnel and have “cleaned up” the organization. The issue is that Paxton’s involvement wasn’t part of a criminal-type investigation, but rather pursuant to AG statutory duty to intervene in litigation involving a charity for the purpose of protecting the charity (and its finances). According to Chester, Paxton’s “settlement” that he was attempting to force them into would have resulted in a loss of $17 million compared to the $23 million they “stand to receive” from the sale of Paul’s properties in satisfaction of judgment.

Kendall Garrison, CEO of Amplify Credit Union. Garrison testified about loans his bank had on three of Nate Paul’s properties in the amount of around $11.5 million. The properties were in foreclosure and Amplify had posted a foreclosure auction for August 4th. On Sunday, August 3, Paul sent Amplify an email with the “midnight” AG opinion shutting down outdoor foreclosure sales due to Covid. The foreclosure was called off—which benefited Nate Paul—although the properties were eventually sold in September. Tribune story here.

Joe Brown, former U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Texas. Brown was the “more experienced” attorney that Paxton was considering to hire for his “Special Counsel” investigation. Brown testified that he immediately became concerned about potential conflicts of interest. “Red flags are going off.” Brown said he knew that Paxton had previous trouble with the Texas State Securities Board and that he told Paxton that he wanted to do his own research before committing to the job. During the interview, Paxton complained that he “couldn’t get people in his office to do anything.”

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/9/14/2193364/-Summarization-of-the-Case-Against-Paxton

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/