Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick seeks complete audit of AG Ken Paxton’s impeachment process.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has followed through on his promise to request an audit of the impeachment process of Attorney General Ken Paxton, aiming to uncover the true cost to Texas taxpayers.
“We need to know the total expenses incurred from the beginning to the end of this trial,” Mr. Patrick emphasized in a letter to Texas State Auditor Lisa Collier on Sept. 18.
The audit should encompass all costs, including investigators’ fees, document production, attorney expenses, witness fees, and travel expenses, among others, according to the letter.
Mr. Patrick has requested that the audit cover all expenses incurred between March 1 and Oct. 15, 2023, and has urged the Texas State Auditor’s Office to prioritize the investigation.
“This impeachment has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars,” Mr. Patrick declared after Mr. Paxton’s acquittal and reinstatement to office. “I will demand a thorough audit of all taxpayer funds spent by the House from the start of their investigation in March until today.”
“An impeachment should never happen again in the House like it happened this year,” he added.
Setting the Record Straight
During his speech, the Senate leader expressed his frustration with the House for disregarding precedent in bringing forth the impeachment charges.
“It is crucial to provide a complete and accurate account of what transpired and how we arrived at this point,” he emphasized.
Mr. Patrick, who had remained silent about the House procedures until the conclusion of the proceedings, had previously pledged that the Senate would conduct a fair and transparent trial.
The last Texas official to be convicted in an impeachment trial was Gov. James Ferguson in 1917.
“The House rushed the vote to send articles of impeachment against the attorney general to the Senate, allowing members very little time to review the 20 articles,” Mr. Patrick criticized. “The Speaker and his team pushed through the first impeachment of a statewide-elected official in Texas in over 100 years without considering precedent.”
The House Committee on General Investigating launched a secret investigation into Mr. Paxton in March, which was revealed on May 23.
“In the past, the target of the investigation was given notice and the opportunity to attend with legal counsel, cross-examine witnesses under oath, and evaluate the evidence for weeks,” he noted, referring to the Ferguson case.
On May 25, the House committee unanimously recommended impeachment on 20 articles, accusing Mr. Paxton of bribery and abusing his office to benefit a real estate investor.
“However, none of these procedures were followed before the Republican-led House voted 121–23 to impeach Mr. Paxton on May 27,” Mr. Patrick revealed.
Republican state Rep. John Smithee, one of the 23 Republicans who voted against impeachment, was the first to voice his opposition during the May 27 debate.
“There is no admissible evidence in the testimony before you that would hold up in a Texas court of law,” Mr. Smithee argued. “It is hearsay within hearsay within hearsay.”
However, state Rep. Andrew Murr, chair of the House Investigating Committee, contended that it was not the House’s responsibility to establish the facts.
“This body does not conduct fact-finding; that occurs in the Senate, where witnesses are sworn in,” Mr. Murr explained to the House in May.
Amendments for Future Proceedings
Mr. Patrick commended Mr. Smithee’s speech during his closing remarks, describing it as “one of the most honest and courageous speeches I have ever heard in the House.”
Mr. Patrick asserted that the House was able to exploit a “flawed process” due to the language in the Texas Constitution, and he emphasized the need to address this issue in the next regular session starting in January 2025.
“Any testimony given during a House impeachment investigation must be under oath, and the target must have the right to be present with legal representation to cross-examine witnesses,” he stated. “Otherwise, individuals can make baseless claims without accountability or the need for truthfulness, as there is no risk of consequences.”
Mr. Patrick believed that the impeachment trial would not have proceeded if House members had been given “at least two weeks to review all evidence under oath before voting on such a serious matter.”
He also criticized the suspension without pay imposed on Mr. Paxton when the House sent the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
“The federal system does not allow for that,” Mr. Patrick pointed out. “Neither President Clinton nor President Trump had to step down from their duties during their impeachment processes. This is not a partisan issue.”
What is the significance of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick calling for an audit of the impeachment process?
S quoted in the article saying, ”This was not an impeachment, it was a political hit job.”
Mr. Patrick’s call for an audit of the impeachment process is a significant step in holding the House accountable for its actions. The impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton was a highly contentious and controversial process, and it is important to ensure that taxpayer funds were not wasted on a politically motivated endeavor.
The audit, as requested by Mr. Patrick, should cover all expenses incurred during the impeachment process, including investigators’ fees, document production, attorney expenses, witness fees, and travel expenses. This comprehensive review will provide a transparent account of the true cost to Texas taxpayers.
In his letter to Texas State Auditor Lisa Collier, Mr. Patrick emphasized the need to know the total expenses incurred from the beginning to the end of the trial. This request encompasses a specific time frame, from March 1 to October 15, 2023, and underscores the urgency of prioritizing the investigation. The goal is to shed light on the financial implications of the impeachment and ensure that such a waste of taxpayer dollars does not happen again.
Mr. Patrick’s frustration with the House comes as no surprise. He criticized the House for rushing the vote to send articles of impeachment to the Senate, allowing little time for review. In his view, the House failed to consider precedent and disregarded proper procedures. This lack of adherence to established protocols is particularly concerning given the historical significance of the impeachment. Mr. Paxton’s impeachment marked the first impeachment of a statewide-elected official in Texas in over 100 years.
The House’s secret investigation and the subsequent rush to impeach Mr. Paxton have raised eyebrows and sparked criticism. In previous cases, the target of the investigation was given notice and the opportunity to defend themselves with legal counsel. However, in this instance, procedures were not followed, and Mr. Paxton was impeached without the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or evaluate the evidence for weeks.
It is crucial to set the record straight and provide an accurate account of what transpired during the impeachment process. Through the requested audit, Mr. Patrick seeks to uncover the truth behind the House’s actions and shed light on any potential misconduct or misuse of taxpayer funds.
The audit will serve as an important tool in holding the House accountable and ensuring transparency in the impeachment process. It is a necessary step toward restoring faith in the government and preventing similar instances of rushed and politically motivated impeachments in the future.
In conclusion, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s request for an audit of the impeachment process of Attorney General Ken Paxton is a significant move toward uncovering the true cost to Texas taxpayers. It is crucial to conduct a comprehensive review of all expenses incurred during the impeachment process to ensure transparency and accountability. The audit will shed light on any
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
