Featured Texas Gov. Perry indicted for coercion

You're right. The prosecutor. Appointed by the judge.


I think the dems might have had a better chance trying to override the veto ?

 

I agree with you--this is just Democrats trying to jam the courts as they did in Alaska.

I cannot feel sorry for a lawyer who broke the law. She was guilty of P.I.--I suppose that she is going to say that that was political, too.

Here in Indiana, we have a small state agency to monitor lawyers, judges, and law students who have problems with alcohol or drugs or mental illness. It is estimated that a large percentage of lawyers have such problems but only a few are weeded out.

 

You have to practice to be able to drink to a .238, and still be able to talk. That don't come overnight. Most people would be face down.

And the investigation into Perry's "favors" will no doubt be on hold, and I'm way more interested to know what was going on there.

 

Thanx. Like I said, they'll probably milk it for what they can, then drop the charges.

 

Yes, I subsequently saw this in one of the articles linked to in Use of Time's article. So why wasn't this method invoked?

 

He isn't being indicted for using his veto though. He has that right. It's the fact that he was publicly threatening to use his political power to veto to coerce her to resign. I don't think anybody under the sun can defend her actions and she easily comes across as a pretty reprehensible person. I don't know if the indictment is going to amount to anything serious for Perry I'm just telling you the basis on which it was formed.

 

Exactly my question. I'm not a lawyer but I am legitimately curious why he took the route he did because it seems to me on the surface that he could have gotten rid of her without risking his Presidential aspirations. Thats why I'm inclined to say his motives were not criminal just unaware of policy.

 

Thanks. That's been a question I've had since last night. Good to know.

 

I agree with you. No one says Perry does not have the right to use his veto on legislation. However, to say I will veto the legislation if so-and-so does not resign is at the least unethical and at worst illegal.

Can you imagine the uproar from the GOP if Obama threatened to veto legislation unless a Tea Party member resigned from Congress?

 

I didn't know he had been tried yet. He'll finish his term.

A truism is that anyone can be indicted for anything in Texas. Austin is the most liberal city in Texas, overwhelming democrat. They've been after Perry for a long time.

I wonder what the drunk woman is doing now?

 

That's not a concern at all. A lot of people aspire to be president.

He was never going to get the nomination from the republican party to run for president.

 

Not a bad summary.

That's kind of laughable, but not a bad summary.

 

District attorneys in Texas are elected. The governor has no power of appointment, even for a district attorney that resigns or is recalled by the people who elected them.

What he wanted to do was move the office of Public Integrity out from under the control of the Travis County District Attorney so that the governor could appoint someone to fill that office.

Democrats have long used that position in extremely liberal Travis County, Texas to harrass Texas Republicans while giving pretty much a free ride to democrats.

In this case, this woman, if she had an ounce of integrity herself, would have resigned.

Perry simply vetoed state funding for the public integrity unit she ran. Well within his authority. It would have had no effect on the elected office she held as district attorney.

As usual , democrats in Travis County, like everywhere else, will re-elect her to the office of district attorney. They always take care of their lawbreakers and crooks. Integrity to democrats everywhere is a weapon to be used against public opponents, not something they are interested in enforcing in their own party.

 

It is not the veto that got him into trouble. It was his coercion, the threatening of her ... though I feel she should resign ... that got him into trouble. To me the veto is a mute point, that is not where the problem lies.

Frankly I think both should resign from office. I have thought for some time now that Perry is power crazed and not to be trusted.

 

Funny how the righties scream overreach of power when it's a Democratic officeholder, but if one of their boys does it, look at all the justification going on. Perry is a self-pious version of Chris Christie, only with a cowboy hat. As they say in the Lone Star State, he is "all hat, no cattle".

 

No different than the president threatening to veto legislation if he doesn't get what he wants. That's the way the system works.

They have no case.