Thanks for that info.
Texas House Republicans and Senate Republicans are going to war over the fallout from the impeachment. House Speaker Dade Phelan and Lt. Governor Patrick are blasting each other. Patrick has asked the State Auditor to determine how much the impeachment costs taxpayers. Dozens of Republican House members are likely to get well-funded right wing primary challengers. It’s going to be a blood bath going into next year’s election.
I’d be giddy if I thought Texas Democrats were competent enough to do a damn thing to take advantage of the situation.
Trump takes credit for Paxton’s acquittal. Right. 
Former President Donald Trump says he’s the reason why Attorney General Ken Paxton survived a historic impeachment effort.
On Monday, Trump said his eleventh-hour panning of the “shameful” proceedings helped swing the Senate to acquit Paxton on all 16 impeachment charges.
“Yes, it is true that my intervention through TRUTH SOCIAL saved Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton from going down at the hands of Democrats and some Republicans,” Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social.
There is no evidence Trump’s statement, which cast the trial as an attempt by “establishment RINOs” to undo Paxton’s reelection last year, played a decisive role in the senators’ decision.
…
“Ken has been a great A.G., and now he can go back to work for the wonderful people of Texas,” Trump wrote. “It was my honor to have helped correct this injustice!”
…
Imagine Trump and Teddy Roosevelt in an “ego-off.” No one else would be able to fit in the room.
To borrow from Top Gun, Trump’s ego is writing checks his body can’t cash. Roosevelt could get stuff done.
“Stomp loudly and carry a Diet Coke in both of your tiny hands.”
Granted, they both have huge egos, but Trump is a whiny person who quite literally runs away if someone isn’t being ‘nice’ (read utterly subservient and deferential) to him, while Teddy can get -shot- and keep on going.
So even if they both have egos the same size, one is encased in “rich Corinthian leather” and the other is wrapped in Saran-Wrap.
Okay, back to Ken Paxton. I spoke with a friend who is a Texas DA, and boy, were they crushed. No, they fully expected that the fix was in as it were, since the Senate couldn’t even be bothered to remove his wife even while restricting her vote, but they hoped that after an acquittal, there would have been a letter along the lines “while we feel he isn’t guilty of these crimes, we feel that his actions do not reflect well on the Great State of Texas ™” so there was at least a sense that Paxton had gone too far.
That’s… not the message they’re sending at this time at least.
The big question is TX going to fund the multi-million dollar settlement now, or is Paxton back to drawing table?
The legislature refused to fund the settlement in the two-year state budget they passed in May. So he’s out of luck at least until 2025.
Does the Texas Senate have the power under the state constitution to bar one of its members from participating in Senate business?
Granted, they may have felt they lacked explicit power to do so, but they certainly could and should have utilized soft power / pressure to ensure she stood down to preserve the tattered, battered appearance of impartial judgement.
The fact that they do not even bother with such a fig leaf indicates just how broken things are in Texas right now. And if anything, getting worse.
“Slightly soiled,
Tattered and toiled,
But - Democracy!”
Paxton says he may run against Sen. John Cornyn in 2026. Better the devil you know, or “Let Them Fight?”
Tucker Carlson on Twitter: “Liberals like Karl Rove just tried to annihilate Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. It didn’t work.”
Karl Rove and AOC, birds of a feather. 
They prevented her from debate and voting. Unless you are thinking the Republicans should have said F the Constitution what more do you want them to do?
I don’t think I even came close to implying that. I said, as you quoted, soft power / pressure to ensure she stood down. You don’t think they have the ability to do that? Support for her personal/political priorities other than her spouse in the legislature?
Or, as I said later, convinced her that the appearance of it was unspeakably bad for the party of law-and-order? The fact that they didn’t further reinforces the point that Texas is bad enough that even the semblance of equal treatment under the law, and the respect for democratic norms is gone under perpetual minority political rule in that state.
No I don’t. Under the Texas Constitution she had to participate - even if it is only showing up which is what the Pubs said to do. So asking her not to participate is F the Constitution. They told her not to vote or debate so I don’t know what else you want them to have done.
-points to numerous democratic reps who left rather than vote on issues, calling in ‘sick’, doing a short speech about 'avoiding the appearance of propriety and choosing to not show up, and on and on and on-
You assume she and the GOP itself have no agency. That’s… unique.
As I understand it, even though she’s not allowed to vote, she’s counted as “present” for the vote tally. So, essentially another “no” vote whether she actually votes that way or not.
Reminds me of how Stalin had so many executed for insufficient revolutionary zeal.
You are either a 100% rabid supporter or a total unmitigated Traitor to the Cause; there is no middle ground.
When a movement tells you who they are, pay attention.
And in the Stalin example, Stalin gets to decide if Old Bolsheviks are no longer 100% committed to the cause.