|
|
Post by kashmir on Aug 15, 2014 20:47:27 GMT -5
Texas Gov. Rick Perry was indicted Friday on abuse-of-power charges involving his veto of funding for investigators charged with upholding the integrity of state lawmakers. The two-count indictment, handed up by a grand jury in Austin, followed a months-long investigation into Perry’s dealings with the Travis County District Attorney’s Office, which houses the state’s public integrity unit. The case grew out of the drunken driving arrest last year of Travis County Dist. Atty. Rosemary Lehmberg. After Lehmberg’s conviction, Perry threatened to veto funding for her office unless she stepped down. Lehmberg served a jail sentence but refused to quit, and Perry followed through on his threat, zeroing out $7.5 million in funding for her office. Lehmberg, a Democrat, had long been a target of Republicans, who accused her of partisanship in her oversight of the state government, which is controlled entirely by GOP lawmakers. Aides to Perry said he properly exercised his authority as chief executive. But a government watchdog group filed a complaint that resulted in the appointment of a special prosecutor. RutRoh  www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-na-pn-rick-perry-indictment-texas-20140815-story.html |
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 15, 2014 20:51:20 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Aug 15, 2014 20:53:09 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Good lord. Surrender post already? |
|
|
|
Post by stevez51 on Aug 15, 2014 22:14:06 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Wrong party. Only worries about the Pubs .... |
|
|
|
Post by freddfish on Aug 15, 2014 23:21:49 GMT -5
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxX-qhJTfkIThis is a 4 min video of the Dem prosecutor that Gov Perry didn't feel fit to hold a position of public trust, filmed in the police station where she was brought upon her arrest. She is being jailed for drunk driving (3x over the legal limit) and had to be put in a restraining chair once in custody because of her bizarre and combative behavior. It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic...and I can only imagine what people who have been sentenced to fines, community service and prison terms must feel like when they watch it. The shoe is truly on the other foot. After watching this, I don't really think Gov Perry has too much to worry about.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2014 0:53:24 GMT -5
Not exactly an open and shut case.
The Texas Constitution gives the governor discretion to decide when to sign and when to veto a bill, as well as the authority to veto line items within an appropriations bill. Although it's likely that the legislature could limit this veto power in extreme cases--such as selling his veto to friendly special interests--curtailing said power too sharply could--and should--raise separation of power concerns.
Texas is a red state. What if a Democrat were elected governor and the legislature passed a law prohibiting them from vetoing restrictions on abortion? Such a law would most assuredly skew the balance between executive and legislature and run afoul of the state constitution. The task facing the special prosecutor will be to convince a court that a law preventing the governor from strong-arming a clearly compromised public official out of office is not an unconstitutional restriction on gubernatorial power, but rather, a legitimate means of dealing with corruption.
It's also interesting to note that Texans for Public Justic, the so-called "watchdog" group which filed the initial complaint against Perry in 2013, isn't really public and it certainly isn't Texan. Much of its funding appears to come from outside the state, most notably from organizations based in Washington, DC and New York. Granted, it isn't required by law to reveal its donors, but an advocacy group that carefully guards the keys to the vault is typically attempting to hide a political agenda.
TPG is less like a watchdog and more like and attack dog. The targets almost always fall under one or more of the following headings: conservatives, Republicans, businesses and tort reformers. Much of their "work" seems to center around a central theme: Texas would be a better place if we could just file more lawsuits. That would make them nothing more than a de facto mouthpiece for the powerful Texas Trial Lawyers Association, the statewide lobby for Texas plaintiff lawyers.
|
|
|
|
Post by magnaestback on Aug 16, 2014 1:19:53 GMT -5
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxX-qhJTfkIThis is a 4 min video of the Dem prosecutor that Gov Perry didn't feel fit to hold a position of public trust, filmed in the police station where she was brought upon her arrest. She is being jailed for drunk driving (3x over the legal limit) and had to be put in a restraining chair once in custody because of her bizarre and combative behavior. It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic...and I can only imagine what people who have been sentenced to fines, community service and prison terms must feel like when they watch it. The shoe is truly on the other foot. After watching this, I don't really think Gov Perry has too much to worry about..... OMG, shades of drunken Ann Richards! .23 Richards and Bubba's dime store whore would really have to try and beat that! |
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 16, 2014 7:34:52 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Wrong party. Only worries about the Pubs .... Well, that's just it... this isn't a case where the 'pubs' are the ones who need to be concerned. What we're seeing here is Nifongian abuse of power by a corrupt Democrat District Attorney. This case is going to turn into a black eye for Democrats - and rather quickly, too. The obviousness of the selective outrage and hyper-partisanship can't really be disguised, even by a media that will do everything in its power to do so. Democrats will come out in support of this case in droves - we're already seeing it with this thread. And then, when people realize Perry has been indicted for threatening to do something no one doubts that he has the authority to do, the raging hypocrisy of the Democratic party will be on display for everyone to see. Especially as it applies to President Obama - who's getting a pass even though he's trying to do things he clearly doesn't have the authority to do. |
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Aug 16, 2014 7:59:36 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Surrendering so soon?  |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2014 10:08:04 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Surrendering so soon? It looks like you are. Since Perry has every authority to veto anything he wants, and this bimbo is very obviously not fit for public office, this is very much like what the Dems did to Palin: keep filing lawsuits, even though they all get thrown out, to keep Perry from actually governing. |
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 16, 2014 10:35:22 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Look closely at the kind of legislation Perry's jammed up over. It matters... A drunk should not be an officer of the court. But did Perry put pressure on her because she was a drunk, or because she was a political opponent? That's the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2014 10:46:09 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Look closely at the kind of legislation Perry's jammed up over. It matters... A drunk should not be an officer of the court. But did Perry put pressure on her because she was a drunk, or because she was a political opponent? That's the issue. Does it matter? She is a drunk, and a belligerent drunk. The fact that she's a Democrat may be icing on the cake, but I'd bet a dollar to a donut that driving drunk is not the only crimes she's committed. The Dems are now fund raising off of protecting a criminal drunk. Wonder how well that's going to play out in the coming elections? |
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 16, 2014 13:23:19 GMT -5
When are you going to call for the indictment of President Obama for threatening to veto legislation? I mean, if you really want to be consistent, you'd sort of need to do that. Look closely at the kind of legislation Perry's jammed up over. It matters... A drunk should not be an officer of the court. But did Perry put pressure on her because she was a drunk, or because she was a political opponent? That's the issue. No. It doesn't matter. It is obvious Perry's actions have nothing to do with her being a political opponent. How many other Democrat District Attornies are there in Texas? How many of them did Perry threaten to defund? This case exists because THIS DA is a brlligerant drunk in charge of a DA office that focuses on anti-corruption cases. |
|
|
|
Post by magnaestback on Aug 16, 2014 13:56:08 GMT -5
Kennedy, Ann Richards and this sleeze bimbo.... what do they all have in common?
|
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Aug 16, 2014 14:16:00 GMT -5
Rick Perry was certain, with his new pair of glasses, he was fooling everyone into thinking he was soooooo much smarter now.
|
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2014 14:20:58 GMT -5
Rick Perry was certain, with his new pair of glasses, he was fooling everyone into thinking he was soooooo much smarter now. Please, please, please Democrats, defend a drunk driver, who attacked the police officers that arrested her. Please do so. |
|
|
|
Post by magnaestback on Aug 16, 2014 14:31:19 GMT -5
Perry can use that video during campaign. He might even get some leftist that belong to MADD. Why kind of NUTS support a drunk?  |
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Aug 16, 2014 14:35:31 GMT -5
I guess it is all over for Rick Perry.
Next?
|
|
|
|
Post by r686st on Aug 16, 2014 16:04:56 GMT -5
Rick Perry was certain, with his new pair of glasses, he was fooling everyone into thinking he was soooooo much smarter now. Please, please, please Democrats, defend a drunk driver, who attacked the police officers that arrested her. Please do so. They have an affinity for drunk drivers. See also: Chappaquiddick.
|
|
|
|
Post by magnaestback on Aug 16, 2014 16:19:16 GMT -5
Please, please, please Democrats, defend a drunk driver, who attacked the police officers that arrested her. Please do so. They have an affinity for drunk drivers. See also: Chappaquiddick.
Absolutely, and drunk rapist too! (no need to post Bubba's pic) we all still remember him.  |
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 16, 2014 19:46:48 GMT -5
It is obvious Perry's actions have nothing to do with her being a political opponent. How many other Democrat District Attornies are there in Texas? How many of them did Perry threaten to defund? This case exists because THIS DA is a brlligerant drunk in charge of a DA office that focuses on anti-corruption cases. It may be obvious to you, but you're very partisan. It's not obvious to me. And what they'll explore at trial is whether he had the authority to do this. Sure, she's a drunk. Sure, she should be out of office. But did Perry break the law? On the other hand, the same liberals crowing about Perry going "down" were saying the same thing about Christie and... we're still waiting. Their own party could not find evidence Christie did anything wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 16, 2014 20:19:05 GMT -5
It is obvious Perry's actions have nothing to do with her being a political opponent. How many other Democrat District Attornies are there in Texas? How many of them did Perry threaten to defund? This case exists because THIS DA is a brlligerant drunk in charge of a DA office that focuses on anti-corruption cases. It may be obvious to you, but you're very partisan. It's not obvious to me. And what they'll explore at trial is whether he had the authority to do this. Sure, she's a drunk. Sure, she should be out of office. But did Perry break the law? On the other hand, the same liberals crowing about Perry going "down" were saying the same thing about Christie and... we're still waiting. Their own party could not find evidence Christie did anything wrong. What is obvious to me is that Perry doesn't make a habit of defunding offices controlled by Democrats. This was a specific office, held by a specific Democrat, with a very reasonable and specific explanation as to why he did it. No one doubts Governor Perry has the authority to veto line items in the state budget. If he has the legal authority to do this, that just leaves the 'why' to be explored. I know the Democrats will say "It's because she's a Democrat" - but that dog won't hunt because he hasn't done this with other Democrats. Gov. Perry says 'It's because she was convicted of DUI, and was belligerent in the process, and that disqualifies her from holding an office like this.' You don't seem willing to take the position that thinking is unreasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 16, 2014 20:57:23 GMT -5
It is obvious Perry's actions have nothing to do with her being a political opponent. How many other Democrat District Attornies are there in Texas? How many of them did Perry threaten to defund? This case exists because THIS DA is a brlligerant drunk in charge of a DA office that focuses on anti-corruption cases. It may be obvious to you, but you're very partisan. It's not obvious to me. And what they'll explore at trial is whether he had the authority to do this. Sure, she's a drunk. Sure, she should be out of office. But did Perry break the law? On the other hand, the same liberals crowing about Perry going "down" were saying the same thing about Christie and... we're still waiting. Their own party could not find evidence Christie did anything wrong. They also ignore the chicanery of The Puppet. However, this woman was not only a DA, but either part of, or the head of, a corruption unit. |
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Aug 16, 2014 21:42:01 GMT -5
It may be obvious to you, but you're very partisan. It's not obvious to me. And what they'll explore at trial is whether he had the authority to do this. Sure, she's a drunk. Sure, she should be out of office. But did Perry break the law? On the other hand, the same liberals crowing about Perry going "down" were saying the same thing about Christie and... we're still waiting. Their own party could not find evidence Christie did anything wrong. They also ignore the chicanery of The Puppet. However, this woman was not only a DA, but either part of, or the head of, a corruption unit. Rick Perry is toast.......... |
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 16, 2014 21:52:35 GMT -5
I know the Democrats will say "It's because she's a Democrat" - but that dog won't hunt because he hasn't done this with other Democrats. Gov. Perry says 'It's because she was convicted of DUI, and was belligerent in the process, and that disqualifies her from holding an office like this.' You don't seem willing to take the position that thinking is unreasonable. I believe I said she doesn't belong in office. We'll see what the courts say. |
|
