My point being that even if the two both voted against it, how would that stop the indictment?
What are the rules for a Grand Jury returning an indictment? I’m completely in the dark here–how many votes do you need?
Because the crime created a legitimate reason for wanting her to resign. Without the crime, there was no legitimate reason to question whether she was fit to head up a Public Ethics Unit. Her illegal activity and subsequent behavior, changes that.
Sad that our system has come down to, “How many Republicans were on the Grand Jury” and not, “Did he commit a crime, or not?”
I still fail to see how a public veto threat can be criminal. I also fail to see how any government agency is entitled to funding.
This is really simple. The legislature could have voted to defund this agency at any time, for any reason. I think we’re all agreed on that, unless someone seriously thinks the legislature can be arrested en masse for exercising its’ power of the purse for the “wrong” reasons.
And any members of the legislature that voted to uphold his veto were either co-conspirators or aiding and abetting. They were certainly accessories after the fact to the governor’s criminal actions.
That makes no sense. At best, a legislative action can be judged a “bill of attainder” and ruled unconstitutional.
I guess you support nearly every House Democrat going to jail then, because they voted to take away bonuses from AIG employees, a clearly illegal act.
I was trying to make the point that if the governor is guilty of a crime for using his veto to defund the agency, then the logical conclusion is that any legislator who voted to sustain that veto is helping in the commission of the illegal act.
No, I don’t support nearly every House Democrat going to jail and I don’t support any Texas legislators going to jail. But I was pointing out the absurd conclusions we could reach if we go down the road of criminalizing the governor’s veto.
Unless there is some other circumstance (they accepted a bribe, for example) I don’t believe that either the legislature or the governor should be held criminally responsible for exercising their respective prerogatives.
This is my first time posting here after a very long hiatus (And first time with this account. I used to post as Amberlei wayyyy back when). I have rather strong thoughts on this and wanted a forum to voice my thoughts, so here ya go.
I believee the DUI was just a red herring. Plenty of other elected officials in TX have gotten DUIs since Perry was in office, but he’s not demanded any of the others resign. From a quick google search, I came up with the following list of offenders.
Gonzalo Barrientos, (D) Senator, November 2001
Kevin Brady, (R) Congressman, October, 2005
Harold Dutton, (D) State Representative, April, 2007
Mike Krusee, (R) State Representative, April, 2008
Pat Ahumada, (D) Mayor, Brownsville, TX, May, 2010
Greg Tierney, (I) City Councilman, Lewisville, TX February, 2011
Alonzo Perez, (?) Mayor, Elsa, TX October, 2011
Joe Smith, (D) City Councilman, Sherman, TX, June, 2012 and March, 2013
Marcus Knight, (I) Mayor, Lancaster, TX, November, 2012
Nora Longoria, (D) Appeals Court Judge, July, 2014
Of these, the only one to resign was Greg Tierney.
At the time when Perry was calling for Lehmberg’s resignation, she was in charge of overseeing the Public Integrity Unit (PIU), which was investigating potential misconduct at the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT). The mission of CPRIT is to support cancer research by providing funding awarded via a peer review process. The Oversight Committee (OC) of CPRIT is comprised of political appointees, many of whom were personally appointed by Perry. Notably, the OC has authority to veto funding on projects they deem non-meritorious, but does not have power to authorize funding in the absence of scientific approval by peer-reviewers. However, the OC awarded 20 million to the MD Anderson without subjecting the proposal to scientific review. Additionally, another 11 million was awarded to Peloton Therapeutics, though in that instance both the scientific and OC review processes were skipped. It is interesting that after CPRIT was approved, yet before any proposals were even being accepted, Perry announced that David Shanahan, president of the Mary Crowley Medical Research Center and a major campaign contributor, would be awarded CPRIT funding. Shanahan has since received 12.8 million from CPRIT. Similarly, campaign contributors of Greg Abbot, who is on the OC committee, have received over 42 million in CPRIT funding.
I think that Perry seized upon the opportunity provided by the DA’s DUI to try to shut down the investigation into misallocation of CPRIT funds. If she resigned, he could appoint her replacement, guaranteeing the investigation would be halted. If she didn’t, then here’s an excuse to cut off PIU funding, greatly hampering their investigative abilities.
http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=57478
http://watchdogblog.dallasnews.com/2013/01/travis-county-da-the-cprit-investigation-is-ongoing-and-aggressive.html/
Now THIS looks like a clear abuse of power:
They got some unwanted publicity and some pushback for this program, but it’s pretty clear the administration was trying to kill legal businesses using the regulatory process. If that’s not abuse of power, I don’t know what is.
Oh for crying out loud! The governor’s veto was not and is not illegal. The crime of which he is accused is using the power of his office (vis a vis the aforementioned veto) to coerce another elected official (Lehmberg) to perform a specific act (resign) which she otherwise would not have performed absent the coercion. The VETO isn’t illegal. The THREAT of the veto is illegal (perhaps). Had he just cut the funding and kept his stupid mouth shut, no crime would have been committed. Perry, however, decided that he was the Boss Hogg of Texas and could threaten anyone to bend to his will. He was mistaken.
I hope the guy rots in prison. The fact that Lehmberg is not a very sympathetic figure in own right is irrelevant to me.
Oooooooooorrrrrr, the administration was trying to prevent banks from abetting illegal activities. Maybe this was a ham-handed way to do that, but it is still a reasonable interpretation of the events described in your quoted passage.
Okay, so elected officials may not use the threat of funding reductions or cutoffs to coerce behavior on the part of citizens or companies. Got it.
Count David Axelrod and Johnathon Chait as skeptical of this indictment:
Alan Dershowitz is actually “outraged”:
And why shouldn’t he be? This smears the law profession worse than 1000 lawyer jokes.
I got your point,
Certainly it would stop the indictment if a couple more joined with them. My point being that the jury was not loaded with dem “flower children” as has been alleged. Of the 6 who were not registered to any party, it’s likely a couple of them also vote republican (obviously, not certain).
It was a line item veto; the legislature doesn’t vote to “uphold” it.
I’m sorry. I should have said “doesn’t vote to override it.” Is that better?
But see, that’s how Democrats do things. Underhanded, hidden, in the dark. You think that everyone should do it this way.
Did he commit a crime? has also been discussed! and in quite a bit more detail than the other.