Why the conventional wisdom in the Rick Perry indictment story might be incomplete
By Wayne Slater
wslater@dallasnews.com
9:54 am on August 20, 2014 | Permalink
The conventional wisdom following Rick Perry’s indictment on charges of abuse of power has been strikingly uniform in the national media – the governor’s getting a raw deal. Newspapers, on-line outlets and thoughtful Beltway pundits were quick to pronounce the charges a political witch hunt against a governor performing his duly constituted duties.
 The narrative goes like this: Perry is the victim of a smear campaign by Democrats who want to hurt his presidential prospects because he vetoed funding, as is his right, for an office run by a district attorney convicted of drunken driving. Even some Democrats in Texas say it won’t be easy getting a conviction. But as is often the case, there’s more to the story. Here are five things to consider in evaluating the conventional wisdom.
1) The case is about politics. Within hours of the indictment by a Travis County grand jury, Perry denounced it a partisan attack by political enemies. When he turned himself in for booking Tuesday, the governor cast himself a victim of retribution for vetoing funding for a Democratic district attorney.
The Travis County district attorney is not prosecuting Perry. The state district judge in the case is a Republican appointed by George W. Bush when he was governor. The judge selected San Antonio lawyer Mike McCrum as the special prosecutor in the case. McCrum served as a federal prosecutor in the administration of President George H.W. Bush and was supported by Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison as a potential U.S. attorney candidate.
2) Perry punished a district attorney for drunken driving. Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg was convicted last year of driving while intoxicated. A video of her post-arrest tirade in jail in which she had to be restrained by officers has been widely distributed, including by Perry’s federal political committee, RickPAC.
As Christy Hoppe reports today, when two other district attorneys faced the same charges under similar circumstances, Perry did nothing. One involved a Kaufman County district attorney arrested in 2009 after driving the wrong way down a street and hitting another car. It was his second conviction for DWI. The other was a Swisher County district attorney convicted and jailed after a family called police to report him swerving into oncoming traffic and running off the road.
One difference is that Perry had leverage over Lehmberg, whose office contains the state-funded Public Integrity Unit. Another difference, Lehmberg is a Democrat. The other two district attorneys were Republicans.
3) The case is about a veto. As Perry and his lawyers have said, governors have the right to issue a veto for virtually any reason they want. The indictment is about an alleged abuse of power. It contends Perry threatened to veto funds in an unsuccessful effort to muscle a duly elected county officials from office.
One way to think about the prosecution: It’s perfectly legal to veto something. And it’s perfectly legal to demand that an elected official you don’t like should resign. But it might be illegal to link the two.
For example, it’s legal to make a campaign contribution. And it’s legal to ask somebody to do something. But it’s illegal to tie one to the other. One area apparently explored by the grand jury was whether there were post-veto discussions in which the issue was no longer a veto but whether Perry’s side considered paying state money to restore funding if Lehmberg would leave or take another job.
4) The district attorney was investigating insider dealing in a Perry program. At the time of the veto, the district attorney’s public integrity unit, which investigates public corruption, was looking into questions about Perry’s signature Texas Cancer Research and Prevention Institute. A number of big Republican donors were investors in projects that got state money. At least one Perry political contributor got millions of dollars in taxpayer money without proper review.
If Lehmberg resigned, Perry would have appointed her replacement.
5) The indictment was an effort to damage Perry’s 2016 presidential hopes. After his disastrous 2012 bid crystallized by a nationally televised “oops” moment in which he couldn’t remember the three federal agencies he promised to abolish, Perry has sought to rehabilitate his political image. He’s studied issues, brought in experts on issues both domestic and foreign. He’s traveled extensively talking to voters, especially in the early GOP nominating states of Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire.
The prospects of every story about him for months including the word indictment can’t be helpful. But there’s another school of political thought. Conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post suggests the whole episode might actually help Perry fire up the Republican voters he needs.
“Rather than play the victim as too many conservatives do when treated unfairly by the media or opponents, Perry is rising to the occasion. Coupled with his attacks on the president for inaction on immigration and dispatch of national guardsman to the border, Perry is stepping out at the Republican willing — and able — to take on liberal incompetence and abuse. This surely will be his 2016 theme if he runs for president.”
In the end, a jury might have to decide whether Perry is guilty of a crime or of just good old-fashioned, hardball politics. Whatever they decide, they’ll likely have more than just the conventional wisdom to guide them.
TOP PICKS
Food
10 ways to serve corn on the cob
Pizza
Grab a slice or the whole pie at one of these D-FW pizza joints
TV
6 commercial jingles '80s and '90s Dallas kids will never forget
State Fair food
Big Tex Choice finalist: How the Fried Gulf Shrimp Boil came to be
This entry was posted in 2016 Republican National Convention by Wayne Slater. Bookmark the permalink.
Comments
To post a comment, log into your chosen social network and then add your comment below. Your comments are subject to our Terms of Service and the privacy policy and terms of service of your social network. If you do not want to comment with a social network, please consider writing a letter to the editor.
170 Comments
SortSubscribe RSS
Cris
7 hours ago
The other DA's the author references, did not
run a PIU. So, setting aside the politics, ask yourself, what’s the mission of
a Public Integrity Unit? Lehmberg's actions prove she's a degenerate lush, not
worthy of holding any public office; and here we're talking about an Office of
Public Integrity? Give me a break! Anyone objectively reviewing the entirety of
her arrest videos unequivocally displayed her wretched miscreant character. Her
abrasive dialogue, full of threats aimed at the officers who were just doing
their jobs - was reprehensible. A normal human being, caught up in her
predicament would have shown remorse and asked for consideration, not
aggressively lashed out at the cops, threatening their livelihoods. It's obvious,
this lady in an angry drunk - who should Never be afforded the power to render judgment
on anyone or anything.
ReplyShare
0
2
Bill H
13 hours ago
If Lehmberg resigned, and a Republican were appointed, wouldn't the head of the PIU still be in place, ready to prosecute any wrongdoing related to the cancer project? The idea that Perry's real motivation was to shut down an investigation, that in the end turned up little, doesn't make any sense.
He did it for his stated reason: Lehmberg was a mess who threatened the arresting officers. It might have helped she was a Democratic mess, but there's no real proving that.
Also, you are just wrong that the case is not, in part, about the veto.Count one says the veto itself was criminal.
Count two was about the threat of a veto, but that's what you do when you wield veto power - you threaten to use it. Also, the indictment references specific dates, and it does not include any date after the veto. You ought to read it before you right about it.
Maybe the prosecution is not about politics. We have to know more about McCrum. Maybe he's just stupid or greedy rather than politically motivated.
ReplyShare
1
3
Boromir
13 hours ago
1. Are there any
liberal lawyers who can explain why the grand jury did not ask the special prosecutor, Mike McCrum, to subpoena Rick Perry to the courthouse to answer
their questions about this case?
2. What was the step by step process for Travis County prosecutors to turn their case over to Mike McCrum, the special prosecutor?
3. Just who referred this case to Travis County prosecutors in the first place?
Simple questions that should have been asked long ago by an OBJECTIVE journalist. By the way, I am not a Perry supporter; I just scrutinize "journalism."
If you think Perry has committed a crime, here is a link to Obama's Department of Justice website where you can report a crime:
justice.gov/actioncenter/crime.html
ReplyShare
3 replies
1
2
Susan Wansbrough
13 hours ago
It isn't common for a potential defendant to testify before a grand jury. The special prosecutor had been in communication with Perry's attorney throughout.
The Travis County District Attorney's office recused itself from the case, as did Travis County District Judges due to their working relationship to the DA. The case was referred to a Williamson County judge, who appointed another judge to determine whether there was reason to appoint a special prosecutor. That judge determined there was, and appointed Mr. McCrum. Williamson County is a conservative, mostly Republican county. The two judges were both Republicans.
The complaint was filed by Texans for Public Justice, a non-profit "watchdog" group that pursues complaints against elected officials it believes are acting unethically or criminally. (And corporations, too, I think.). The group has filed complaints against politicians of both parties, but more Republicans than Democrats possibly because since it opened in 1997, there have been many more Republican than Democratic officeholders.
ReplyShare
2 replies
2
0
Boromir
12 hours ago
"It isn't common
for a potential defendant to testify before a grand jury. The special
prosecutor had been in communication with Perry's attorney throughout."
Susan,
if YOU were on the grand jury, would you want to hear one side or
more? Common or uncommon is less important than getting to the truth.
"The special
prosecutor had been in communication with Perry's attorney throughout."
Communication
is one thing; an objective grand jury looking for the truth is
another. Again, if YOU were on the grand jury would you sacrifice your
intelligence to one point of view? All viewpoints must be heard no
matter how much they offend our political persuasion.
"The Travis
County District Attorney's office recused itself from the case, as did
Travis County District Judges due to their working relationship to the
DA."
Yes, they recused themselves, but why? Did they examine
the evidence or were they just worried they would be accused of bias?
What did they tell you?
"The case was referred to a Williamson County judge, who appointed
another judge to determine whether there was reason to appoint a special
prosecutor."
Another punt. Did the Williamson County judge
publicly explain WHY he appointed another judge to decide whether a
special prosecutor should be appointed? Who was the other judge? What
is his/her name? Why are so many layers of the judicial system shying
away from this case?
ReplyShare
1 reply
1
1
Anna
45 minutes ago
Pulbic records...look it up. Educate yourself about grand jury proceedings. This was not a trial to determine guilt or innocence.
ReplyShare
0
0
Scott Fenney
16 hours ago
Let's simplify. Perry stole from cancer research to reward political donors and then he tried to derail this being exposed by firing the investigator and, when that failed, he cut off their funding.
ReplyShare
1 reply
4
0
Scott Fenney
16 hours ago
Now, line up to support that Republicans.
ReplyShare
3
0
Scott Fenney
16 hours ago
Why is this all that different from Nixon firing Archie Cox? This is a Perry modus operandi, remember when he fired the chair and two others (and replaced them with his cronies) from the forensics board days before they were going to hear a report that would have showed that a man was executed for an arson that wasn't an arson? A one party state is dangerous in that those in power feel that their are no limits on their exercise of that power.
ReplyShare
2 replies
2
0
JulieB
16 hours ago
While I agree with you, it's important to note that the forensic board members are appointed and Lehmberg was elected by the voters of Travis County. The board members serve at the will of the governor.
ReplyShare
1 reply
1
0
Whitener Randall
4 hours ago
The governor serves at the will of the PEOPLE.
ReplyShare
0
0
James A Glasscock
16 hours ago
A member of the grand jury was an active delegate to the Texas Democrat Convention. She is all over the Internet with her political leanings and revealed
to the Houston Chronicle she was on the grand jury and also her vote to indict
had nothing to do with her political leanings.
I wonder if McCrum, the San Antonio attorney, who presented the evidence failed to warn the grand jurors about acts such as the delegate? Or perhaps the judge was asleep at the wheel.
Either way, a case can be made that participation in a grand jury and being a delegate to a state convention at the same time taints the indictments or compromises the work of the grand jury.
Should be interesting how this twist of events turns out.
ReplyShare
1 reply
0
4
jack frost
16 hours ago
Reminds me of when Scalia got on airforce two with Cheney to go hunting, just before he ruled in favor of Cheney to seal the documents of Cheney's meeting with the oil companies just before Bush's made up war in Iraq. The highest court in the US is corrupt, and you worry about one Texan who is a democrat. Oh my.
ReplyShare
4
0
Chris Bray
16 hours ago
Odd that this post makes no mention at all of Lehmberg's videotaped threats and abuse of sheriff's deputies and corrections officers during her arrest and booking.
ReplyShare
1 reply
2
7
Anna
29 minutes ago
Why should they? Lehmbuerg is not on trial. She already did her time. This is about Perry.
ReplyShare
0
0
Susan Wansbrough
16 hours ago
What Perry's really saying when he claims the indictment is politically motivated is that our justice system doesn't work. That is really a very startling thing for a governor, and potential presidential candidate, to say.
ReplyShare
8
0
Glenda Hammer
17 hours ago
I thought Perry liked people convicted of DWI'S. In the 2000 Governor and LT. Governor race, Perry had no problem running with convicted DWI'ER GW Bush. Perry didn't mind that Bush was running to be Governor of Texas, or running to be President of the US, but Perry doesn't want somebody convicted of the same crime as GW Bush, investigating him, nor did Perry ask other DA'S in Texas, who have received DWI'S, to resign. But the other DA'S with DWI'S are Republicans, and aren't investigating him for corruption. Perry has used his supposedidly being a Christian Conservative to death, when he knows that he's just a hypocrite.
ReplyShare
7
0
Ricky NonPerry
17 hours ago
If Perry were able to get Lehmberg to resign, he'd have the authority to appoint her replacement. We can assume that would have been a Republican, and that any investigations might have stuttered to a halt. The DA, however, refused, and began to field threats from the governor's office that the PIU budget was to be zeroed out via line item veto. But the exercise of the veto is not what got Perry indicted. The same cronyism appeared to be at work in two other large taxpayer accounts called the Emerging Technology Fund (ETF), and the Texas Enterprise Fund, (TEF), which were supposed to be used to help technology startups and assist companies wanting to move to Texas. In total, the governor and his appointees had purview over about $19 billion and where they wanted it invested.
Back when Perry vetoed the funding, Lehmberg was investigating the state’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, after multiple allegations of corruption under Perry, including the indictment of one official for mishandling a multimillion-dollar grant. “The governor has a legitimate statutory role in the legislative process,” Texans for Public Justice director Craig McDonald, who originally filed the complaint, told the New York Times. “In the case of the Travis County district attorney, the governor had no authority over the district attorney’s job — a district attorney who was elected by Travis County voters and serves exclusively at their will.” Talking to MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki, longtime Texas journalist Jim Moore said it looked like “Perry is trying to circumvent being investigated by anyone.” He noted that Lehmberg served 45 days in jail for her drunk driving conviction, even though there is “a long record in this state of forgiving people and electing them to office” after such crimes. That might sound like a lame liberal excuse, but Moore didn’t even mention the most famous Texas DWI arrest, that of future governor and president George W. Bush. "Indicted but not yet convicted" is not the best slogan for a Republican Presidential candidate but that IS the best they have at this moment. Poor Repubrats!
ReplyShare
1 reply
8
1
jack frost
17 hours ago
An educated person will understand what you posted, and there are many low infromation people who will not understand or give a free pass to any gop.
The funds you mention can not be audited, and Perry and his gop will not allow an audit. Imagine investing in a mutual fund and you ask for the returns, and they say no, we do our owm audit, and you ask for that audit, and they say no, trust us. This is just like the tax dollars for Perry's security, no one will know the true cost because the gop in Texas passed legislation saying that information will be hidden. There was an estimate that Perry's secuirty detail was costing Texas taxpayers 400k a month during his failed run at the white house. There are smart people in Texas who understand how currupt Perry is, and then you have the old angry white tea baggers that will always defend him.
ReplyShare
7
1
Tex
17 hours ago
Funny that the Clinton impeachment was about "perjury" and the threat to sue Obama is about "abuse of power" but this thing is "all about partisan politics." I guess it depends on whose ox is getting gored.
ReplyShare
1 reply
8
1
Gary
17 hours ago
Well you know to hear the republicans they are right about it all and no one should even question their integrity! What a joke!
ReplyShare
6
0
Elizabeth Walley
18 hours ago
Thank you for an objective, accurate report. What a shame the mainstream media isn't as responsible as this columnist.
ReplyShare
1 reply
8
1
Gary
17 hours ago
Hmm, I haven't heard the main stream media any less accurate. Maybe not all the details but they are accurate!
ReplyShare
3
0
Sam McGowan
18 hours ago
The first step will be Perry's attorney to ask the judge to throw the case out. Just because a person has been indicted, doesn't mean the case against them will ever be put before a jury. All a grand jury does is look at evidence presented by the prosecutor and decide if an indictment is warranted. Remember that Tom DeLay's case was thrown out after he was convicted because a judge ruled that he should never have been indicted in the first place. If it does go to trial, it may take years before it gets that far. We'll see what happens. So far, Perry hasn't been convicted of anything.
ReplyShare
4 replies
2
4
Sam McGowan
18 hours ago
Incidentally, the article does not mention that the reason the case went to the judge who appointed McCrum is because none of the Travis County district judges were willing to hear it. They all recused themselves and they took the case to a judge in San Antonio.
ReplyShare
1 reply
8
1
Ricky NonPerry
17 hours ago
And that judge is a Republican I believe.
LMAO
ReplyShare
4
1
dfwinjurylawyer
18 hours ago
Close. A 2 to 1 Court of Appeals, 2 Rs, 1 D ruled that there was insufficient evidence in Delay's case. However, that case is not over. It has been accepted for further review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest court for criminal matters.
ReplyShare
7
0
Ricky NonPerry
17 hours ago
Yeah, eventually the charges were removed against DeLay but that was NOT because he was found innocent - the Law was changed under repubrat administration.
ReplyShare
4
1
Redhead 1217
18 hours ago
This situation will be decided in a court of law where both
sides get to choose jurors they think will decide their way. They will get a limited number of challenges
after which it is who ever isn’t mentally incompetent (no being a liberal
doesn’t count as being incompetent any more than being a fascist counts). After that ya pays yer money and takes yer
chances. See you all in court.
ReplyShare
5
0
martha
19 hours ago
Will the judge please please put a gage order on this bunch!!!!!!
ReplyShare
5 replies
2
1
Tex
17 hours ago
What is a "gage order"???
ReplyShare
2 replies
0
0
Gary
17 hours ago
Really, what's a gag order? And no they shouldn't put a gag order on it. He is supposedly a public servant we should hear it all!
ReplyShare
1 reply
3
0
Redhead 1217
16 hours ago
Every time I hear him pout and blame I want to gag!
ReplyShare
1
0
Susan Wansbrough
16 hours ago
Even if the parties stop talking about it, that won't keep the pundits, of whom there seems to be an unlimited number, from spouting off about it.
ReplyShare
1 reply
4
0
Sam
16 hours ago
Perry's team wants to try Lehmberg in the press.
You know, that lame-stream-media conservatives hate.
ReplyShare
4
0
Ed Lopez
19 hours ago
The sad thing is this issue will get the right wing nuts to propel Perry to the head of the Republican ticket where Hillary, will kick his butt ! Good thinking GOP , give up the White House over a barnaclized fool !
ReplyShare
6 replies
10
1
Kenny Mills
19 hours ago
Rommney and Perry 2016. Boom! shoots down Clinton....
ReplyShare
4 replies
0
9
donovan
18 hours ago
Teacrackers are funny. Try Clinton/Castro 2016...female/latino vs Romney/Perry 2016 ...white old guy/white old guy.
ReplyShare
5
0
Redhead 1217
18 hours ago
Har, har har. Stop! your making me laugh. Romney already flopped and Perry can't be VP from a prison cell. What a joke!
ReplyShare
7
0
Tex
17 hours ago
Good luck with that one, Kenny. In your dreams. Check all of the polling. Hilary is well ahead of all comers.
ReplyShare
3
0
B G W
16 hours ago
That would be making it too easy for Hillary.
ReplyShare
2
0
Redhead 1217
18 hours ago
Ya know. Its crazy how the Republican teasipers seem to always nominate fire breathers who could never get elected in the general election, for what? To prove a point (snort snort)? Whats the point? Nominating either Perry or Cruz would guarantee that in the next election we have our first woman president. What I cant understand is why the American public keeps electing these bozos to the House, after hearing a rep say we wont pass any legislation that makes this president look good. So how is this serving the American public. And by the way, its Romneycare.
ReplyShare
6
0
Biff Loeder
20 hours ago
Comparing Kaufman and Swisher County DA's to the Travis County DA is foolish.
ReplyShare
3 replies
4
7
Andrew
18 hours ago
Correct. Why should he ask the other DAs to step down? After all, they weren't investigating him.
ReplyShare
1 reply
8
0
Sam
16 hours ago
Pretty obvious, like duh.
ReplyShare
1
0
imattclark
18 hours ago
Why?
ReplyShare
3
0
ericbjediknight
20 hours ago
Well, it took a while for the paid Battleground Texas and OFA trolls to get here with their prepackaged links, but they are here now.
ReplyShare
2
5
paul
20 hours ago
Crooks get caught sooner or later Rick, they got Al Capone on tax evasion Rick
ReplyShare
6
0
Nica Libre
20 hours ago
Perry got my vote for president with those glasses. He definitely knows how to manage people and get things done the Texas way. This will serve him well once he becomes president.
Perry for president in 2016 and no doubt he is the best and most qualified candidate out there!
ReplyShare
6 replies
1
13
RichG125
17 hours ago
Unfortunately, I remember the damage the last former governor of Texas caused The United States of America and sincerely hope the Republicans nominate someone else.
ReplyShare
3 replies
4
0
Ricky NonPerry
17 hours ago
No, I think they should put Perry up.
I already bought the popcorn!
ReplyShare
1 reply
3
1
RichG125
14 hours ago
Personally, I'm not into horror movies.
ReplyShare
1
0
Gary
17 hours ago
We will pay for this unwarranted war for years to come in many different ways. I'll also be you that if the draft were instated like it should be we wouldn't have fought that war because of to many rich republican kids having to serve!
ReplyShare
5
0
Ricky NonPerry
17 hours ago
Yes, Gubernor OOPSY happen to be THE BEST the Repub party has to offer.
Yes indeed!
ReplyShare
3
1
B G W
16 hours ago
He is not the brightest guy around. I think he is too dumb to be President. He proved that in the debates last time. That was embarrassing. The comedians had a lot of fun but the President needs more substance than being fodder for the comedians.
ReplyShare
3
0
Eric Foster
20 hours ago
Orange is the new Rick...
ReplyShare
7
0
Robert Pratt
20 hours ago
http://prattontexas.com/2014/08/18/crux-of-gov-perry-indictment-begs-crudility-of-the-ignorant/
ReplyShare
2 replies
0
3
JulieB
18 hours ago
Are you here to discuss the story or promote your blog? If it's the former, the DMN would like to talk to you about taking out an ad.
ReplyShare
1 reply
3
0
Sam
16 hours ago
Thank you.
ReplyShare
3
0
Cuban MustGo
21 hours ago
Don't bother the Republican Perry worshipers with those nasty facts ... we all know how good Perry is with them ... oops!
ReplyShare
13
1
I.M. Watashi
21 hours ago
Slater and Hoppe are working this one. Slater is the guy who gave Wendy her vaccination shot on her single woman educating herself Pinocchio spiel to get that out of the way up front. Now its time for focusing upon Perry, Abbot, and who else Republican for November.
ReplyShare
3
7
Ricky NonPerry
21 hours ago
If the court of Repubrat public opinion has an impact on a jury's decisions, Texas Governor Rick Perry may have a chance of beating his indictments. While poorly informed Democrats like Obama advisor David Axelrod call the indictments "sketchy," Perry's advisors have him concentrating on defending his constitutional authority to exercise the line item budget veto. Except that's not what this case is about. Perry is accused of using his veto authority to coerce a publicly elected official into leaving office. And when the veto threat, and later the actual exercise of the veto didn't work, he tried a bit of bribery, which is why he is facing criminal charges. Not because he exercised his constitutional veto authority. Perry's story which he is desperately trying to peddle os he was trying to get rid of a drunken DA because she was incapable of doijng her job. But Gubernor OOPSY had another motive - a POLITICAL motive. Lehmberg (the DA) is running the Public integrity Unit (PIU).The PIU had been investigating the Cancer Research and Prevention Institute (CPRIT), a $3 billion dollar taxpayer funded project that awarded research and investment grants to startups targeting cancer cures. The entire scientific review team, including Nobel Laureate scientists, resigned because they said millions were handed out through political favoritism by Perry and his appointees. Investigations by Texas newspapers indicated much of the money was ending up in projects proposed by campaign donors and supporters of Governor Perry. In fact, one of the executives of CPRIT was indicted in the PIU investigation for awarding an $11 million dollar grant to a company without the proposal undergoing any type of review. Perry might have been the next target. NOW y'all know WHY Gubernor OOPSY has been indicted for TWO FELONIES and there is better than a 50/50 chance he is going away for a LONG time.
ReplyShare
12 replies
12
2
Ricky NonPerry
21 hours ago
Back when Perry vetoed the funding, Lehmberg was investigating the state’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, after multiple allegations of corruption under Perry, including the indictment of one official for mishandling a multimillion-dollar grant. “The governor has a legitimate statutory role in the legislative process,” Texans for Public Justice director Craig McDonald, who originally filed the complaint, told the New York Times. “In the case of the Travis County district attorney, the governor had no authority over the district attorney’s job — a district attorney who was elected by Travis County voters and serves exclusively at their will.” Talking to MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki, longtime Texas journalist Jim Moore said it looked like “Perry is trying to circumvent being investigated by anyone.” He noted that Lehmberg served 45 days in jail for her drunk driving conviction, even though there is “a long record in this state of forgiving people and electing them to office” after such crimes. That might sound like a lame liberal excuse, but Moore didn’t even mention the most famous Texas DWI arrest, that of future governor and president George W. Bush. "Indicted but not yet convicted" is not the best slogan for a Republican Presidential candidate but that IS the best they have at this moment. Poor Repubrats!
ReplyShare
11 replies
11
1
Norse Gal
19 hours ago
You believe Craig McDonald. The same Craig McDonald who filed a complaint that led to an indictment of Tom DeLay. Tell us, how'd that work out for you?
ReplyShare
10 replies
0
3
donovan
18 hours ago
Apparently it worked out pretty well, where's Tom Delay now? Hint, he ain't in Washington DC.
ReplyShare
2 replies
3
0
Norse Gal
18 hours ago
So, you admit these indictments are nothing more than politics.
ReplyShare
1 reply
0
4
Tex
17 hours ago
Is the House's threat to sue Obama nothing more than politics, too?
Share
4
0
dfwinjurylawyer
18 hours ago
Delay's case is currently pending before the Texas Court of Crim. App. Jury convicted, 2 R Ct. App justices over ruled the jury verdict, while the D justice would have affirmed.
ReplyShare
2
0
JulieB
16 hours ago
It's still under appeal.
ReplyShare
2
0
Susan Wansbrough
16 hours ago
Craig McDonald has an excellent record of integrity. And the complaint just started the process. The complaint is evidence of nothing. The grand jury indicted based on the evidence the special prosecutor uncovered, not on the complaint.
ReplyShare
3
0
Sam
16 hours ago
Hey Julie. Does this gig run until the elections? Tell us how you paid trolls are remunerated? Are there election result bonuses?
You've been outed.
ReplyShare
3 replies
1
1
JulieB
15 hours ago
Do you have any evidence she's being paid??
ReplyShare
2 replies
0
0
Susan Wansbrough
13 hours ago
I want a job as a paid troll. Where do I apply?
Share
0
0
Ted Brown
29 minutes ago
@Susan Wansbrough Your kidding, right, you've been doing it for free?
Share
0
0
Show more comments
Post navigation ? Previous Next ?
Archives
About this blog
The blog for the Dallas Morning News politics team tracks Dallas Fort Worth area, Texas and national campaigns.
Video
Politics Stories
Wendy Davis on the Perry case: ‘I trust the justice system’
 In Dallas, Wendy Davis vows to eliminate statute of limitations for rape, sexual battery cases
<img src="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20140819-453835652.jpg.ece/ALTERNATES/w320/453835652.jpg" alt="" class=" inpage-cropable inpage-image-1869247-ALTERNATES-w320 inpage-dim-320-200 viziwyg-section-7609 " style="clear: both; float: none;" title="Gov. Rick Perry acknowledged supporters as he stepped up to speak to the media before turning himself in to authorities in Austin on Tuesday." height="200" width="320"> Travis DA’s drunken-driving arrest riled Perry; others’ didn’t
|
