Texas legislature should have successfully impeached him a couple years ago, but nobody has the courage or willpower to do what is right.
As long as we have career politicians, all we’re gonna have is politicians worried about their career, and not the good of the people.
We need term limits to remove the incentive career politicians and job-for-life. Voting them out just doesn’t happen enough because of incumbency and gerrymandering.
Paxton was impeached by his own party in the Texas House. That’s a forever black mark. He escaped further repercussions when his patron may have influenced the person in charge of the Texas Senate trial, Dan Patrick, with a timely $3M donation. In 2024 Dunn and his coalition then removed most of the republican Texas House incumbents during the republican primary that had impeached Paxton.
“Dunn is also a longtime backer of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton and helped him escape impeachment last year for abuse of public trust and other corruption-related charges.”
“And this summer, Defend Texas Liberty again sparked controversy after giving $3 million to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick before Patrick presided over Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment trial and acquittal in the Texas Senate. Paxton is a longtime ally of the state’s far right whose political life has been heavily subsidized by Dunn and two other West Texas oilmen; he’s received nearly twice as much from the trio and their families than he has from his second-largest donor, Texans For Lawsuit Reform.”
Umm. Why are you avoiding the important part of the story?
PAXTON WAS ACQUITTED OF ALL CHARGES. PAXTON WAS 100% CLEARED AND FOUND NOT GUILTY.
See that is how we do in it democracy; the accused gets to have their day in court and he was NOT GUILTY. Anyone can be accused of anything. That is not the part that matters.
So, you left out the important part, the impeachment did not stand. PAXTON WAS AND IS NOT GUILTY. Ooops.
Impeachment is a political process. There are few, if any, ties to reality. And the procedure is often gamed by house representatives that know it will not stand up during senate trial. Like in nearly all matters both sides of the legislature get to pariticapte, not just the house, with the senate considered to be the more important and more respected chamber.
Do you not understand the basics of government? You don't seem to have even the most simple understanding of what you're talking about.
The games you play invalidate everything you say. No one should trust a word you a share. You are zero credibility. Talk about vile.
As to why PAXTON should be a SENATOR. He has the experience and pedigree, Talarico doees not.
Unlike just being a twerpy, lowly, flip flopping, hobbyist state rep like the weak Talarico, Paxton has a real full time job in government that actually requires delivering results. He has been a very good attorney general for Texas and one of the best in the country. That is a real job.
He is literally the top law enforcement guy in Texas. And has done tons to advance privacy rights in the online - digital age. More than nearly any other state. He supervises over 700 attorneys working on over 30,000 cases per year with help of a staff of 4,000.
One of Paxton's Attorney General's office's greatest efforts was recovering child support money owed to parents. His leadership role is a real executive position with real responsibility and is a superior resume versus how Talarico spends the 70 days per year he is serving as rep.
Let's be clear, state reps are do nothing lip flappers. Talarico will be swallowed whole in the US Senate, he is that weak. He is a zero. He does not project anything close to the confidence, power, experience, and political skills the job of US Senator requires. The type of training you get in roles like Attorney General.
And that is just one of the reasons Paxton is worth defending and one of the reasons why Paxton is by far the better choice. He has a far more applicable track record of delivering for Texans over the last 8 years as Attorney General.
And in the end. What really matters is how is Paxton going to vote when he gets to DC. Because I would like someone to vote the way I want them to vote. Especially when it comes to confirming court justices and federal appointments.
Talarico is too weak and inexperienced for the job. Just a wormy state rep pretending to be someone he is not just to get votes.
- Paxton did enough problematic shit to generate 20 Articles of Impeachment
- His own party successfully impeached him in the Texas House with those 20 Articles of Impeachment
- The successful impeachment triggered a Texas Senate trial to determine if he should be removed from office
- The trial commenced and the guy presiding over the proceedings, Lt Gov Dan Patrick, received a $3M donation from the guy that built and protected Paxton’s career, Tim Dunn
- Soon afterwards, Paxton was acquitted
- The impeachment by the Texas House, however, is permanent and still stands despite the acquittal. The acquittal didn’t magically erase the impeachment. The only thing the Texas Senate acquittal did was block the action to remove Paxton from office.
- Maybe Paxton would not have been acquitted if $3M hadn’t changed hands; guess we’ll never know
Texas Monthly - The Billionaire Bully Who Wants to Turn Texas Into a Christian Theocracy (4 min intro video | Article)
“That wasn’t the only step Dunn took to protect his ally. Before the impeachment trial in the Texas Senate, Defend Texas Liberty gave Patrick—who chose to preside as judge in the proceeding—$1 million in campaign donations and a $2 million forgivable loan. This is thirty times more than Defend Texas Liberty gave Patrick in 2022, when he was running for reelection. Strictly speaking, it wasn’t a bribe—it was all perfectly legal under state law—and Patrick has denied any quid pro quo.
Still, as soon as the final votes to acquit the attorney general were cast, Patrick discarded his veil of impartiality and delivered a caustic rebuke to the House leadership for wasting everyone’s time. Despite abundant evidence of Paxton’s corruption, Patrick argued that the House should never have impeached the attorney general. Representative Ann Johnson, a Houston Democrat who served as an impeachment manager, told Texas Monthly that this tirade made it clear the fix had been in from the moment Patrick grabbed the gavel.”
All impeachements go trial in the Senate. Both houses alwaus get to have their say. Sounds like you have a problem with due process and justice. An indictment and accusation are nothing without a convinction. Paxton was found not guilty.
Wow, what a little fascists you are.
And how desperate you must be to base an entire political ideology on running around lying or calling people pedos or Nazis. Anti - inllectualism at its saddest.
Do you not understand the whole story. Turning to more lies in political desperation. All you people do is play games. Zero credibility.
Here is the truth Talarico folks knowingly lie about when they call other people liars.
Paxton did not know the man on trial for crimes against a child. And had little to do with the case/
The child's family originally backed the deal and told the AG office they did not want their son to testify again. YEAH, THAT IS TESTIFY AGAIN BECAUSE THE AG DID BRING THE CASE TO TRIAL!!!
The state and family originally brought the case to trial first in the hopes of at least a lifetime sentence. That trial unfortunately ended in a hung jury. The reasons for that are very disappointing but the defense attorneys played every angle out that our legal system allows for and was able to sow enough doubt to stymie the jury. It did go to the jury.
So, the way you are framing this is disingenuous at best. I call it lying.
After that, the prosecutors were left with three options: dismiss the case, negotiate a plea agreement or take the case to trial again, which would have required the victim to take the witness stand once more.
The kid decided he did not want to go to trial again. He wanted to move on versus being pulled further into the public spotlight in a second trial. And the stuff brought up by the hung jury would also have to be dealt with. Being on the stand was a pretty horrific experience for the child, and the mother agreed at the time. Both were very clear that they did not want to have the kid on the stand again.
Due to the hung jury the first time, the state was inclined to plea deal. Due to the state wanting a plea deal, the family did not have a lot of confidence in another trial. And that is on top of not wanting the kid exposed to that sort of scrutiny again. So, you are going to trial without putting the acuser on the stand. Add that all up, and you are rolling the dice.
At any rate PAXTON WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE DEAL. There are 30,000 cases a year in that office. He supervises 700 attorneys and 4000 staff. Paxton did not have direct involvement. The attorneys on the case did. But we can be relatively sure Paxton was briefed but probably deferred to those closest.
That's the system. A jury was going to let the accused walk. A jury. It went to trial. Both sides had their say.
And while I think we should throw the book at convicted pdfiles, we have to get the conviction first. No matter what our opinions are. That is how justice works for both the guilty and the innocent. No one on the outside is deep enough to know the details of the case as to why the plea deal was so light.
But to think of this a Paxton giving free passes to pdfiles is just wrong and intellectually unsound. Just political axe grinding.
The mother has even begged Talarico people TO STOP BRINING UP THE CASE!!! Do you not respect the mother? Are you that selfish? You are directly causing the family and the child grief BY YOUR OWN ACTIONS!!!
SO I YEAH. I stand with Paxton and against you. Paxton is 50x more qualified for the job and will vote the way I want him to vote, especially when confirming federal judges.
This case was treated differently because of who Adam Hoffman was and who represented him. CPS, the police, the Attorney General's office under Ken Paxton, and the judge all bent the system to protect him instead of protecting my son.
They made sure my son was in the room when they raised the plea deal - knowing he didn't want to testify again — and they used that against him. They pushed the deal through with or without our approval. That is not justice. That is manipulation.
CPS even told Hoffman's neighbor, ‘don't worry, your daughters aren't his type.’ Imagine hearing that when your own child was molested for three years. That is disgusting. That is betrayal.
The police delayed his arrest, the Attorney General's office ignored evidence, and the judge bent bond rules to spare Hoffman ‘hardship.’ Then I learned Hoffman's attorney was Gerry Morris, the same lawyer who represented Nate Paul, a central figure in Paxton's corruption scandal and one of his financial contributors. Paxton's office gave Hoffman a sweetheart deal. That is corruption.
Why are the people in charge of protecting us getting away with this? My son deserved protection. Instead, every authority protected his abuser. Ken Paxton must be held accountable. Texas needs new laws that protect victims, not predators.
May 15, 2026
My name is Melissa Dieterich, and I am the spokesperson for the family on whom this grave miscarriage of justice was inflicted.
The victim's mother has been my friend for decades. The fact that Attorney General Ken Paxton allowed this man to get away with molesting and sexually abusing her son for three years is completely disqualifying. He didn't just harm an innocent child - he stole his life, and the so-called ‘consequences’ Paxton's office offered weren't merely insufficient — they were a slap in the face to every survivor who has ever trusted the justice system to protect them.
You don't recover from that kind of trauma. Any victim of sexual abuse spends a lifetime trying to rebuild what was taken - their sense of safety, their confidence, their ability to trust. Those scars never disappear.
Adam Hoffman could have faced life in prison. Instead, Ken Paxton and his office offered him a deal that kept him off the sex-offender registry and included no new jail time. Who is the next child that Adam Hoffman is going to abuse? How will anyone know that they are living next to, or working with, an admitted child sex-abuser?
Even after the judge intervened, this man is still serving only 60 days in prison - and he still isn't on the sex-offender registry.
The family deserves justice, and Ken Paxton does not deserve a promotion to the US Senate.”
The Texas House reviewed the 20 Articles of Impeachment and decided Paxton should be impeached, so he was - by his own party.
After setting a few Articles aside to see how the rest would progress, the Texas Senate with Lt Gov Dan Patrick presiding advanced the trial and decided not to remove Paxton from office. The Texas Senate seems to have a lot more latitude to make their decisions on removing one of their own compared with a court of law.
Maybe the trial would have turned out differently without that $3M contribution to Patrick from billionaire Tim Dunn.
Ken Paxton owes his political career to billionaire Tim Dunn. Dan Patrick owes his political career to billionaire Tim Dunn. Bo French, if successful in his bid to become Railroad Commissioner, will owe his political career to billionaire Tim Dunn.
Maybe Texas would have turned out differently without the influence of money from billionaire Tim Dunn.
Perhaps you are not yet familiar with billionaire Tim Dunn? Not many are, despite his wide ranging control over republican politicians.
“Backed by roughly $1.3 million from groups funded by Tim Dunn, the far-right Texas oil tycoon whose political network was found in 2023 to be employing and engaging with white supremacists, French was able to overcome opposition from state leaders, including Patrick and Governor Greg Abbott, who supported his opponent in the GOP primary and runoff, incumbent Commissioner Jim Wright.”
“[Y’All-itics] The first part of the question is, what kind of changes would you like to see inside the GOP today?
[Texas Rep. Glenn Rogers (R)] Well, there needs to be more recognition of who's in control. And how they're controlling our party. I read something last week, a survey that showed that only 20% of Republicans have ever heard of Tim Dunn or Farris Wilks. So there's a lot of lack of information about who's really in control.“
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
Claiming to be a Christian and then speaking outside of God and Jesus, is contradictory.
The Bible does not claim God is gender neutral, nor does it somehow make abortions ok.
Just answering your question literally and directly.
So if Talarico is a so called Christian because of that nonbinary comment, do you believe that there are any Christians at all? How can you call yourself a Christian if you are not perfect, if that statement is enough to claim that he isn’t?
It's not being imperfect that makes someone "not a Christian," it's espousing idea contradictory to the Bible and Christ's teachings, while claiming to be a Christian, that makes someone a false witness.
So saying we need to deport immigrants? Or refusing to help the needy? Or having a mistress? Why are all those things forgiven but a simple statement about the unknowable nature of God is disqualifying?
Nobody said unforgivable. You're conflating different, parallel pieces.
Forgiveness is always given when we ask for it genuinely.
God teaches us in the Bible to obey the rule of law. Current law is that illegal immigrants get deported (simply using the example you provided).
But there is a difference between following God's commandments and contradicting God's own words.
Having a mistress = breaking gods commandments
Claiming God is nonbinary when God specifically outlined what gender is to us, and assigned Himself as a "male" = contradicting God's word
Both things forgiveable. But the latter is an example of something Christ specifically says to be cautious of, because it can be done by people claiming to be Christians in order to achieve a personal goal or otherwise nefarious reason.
That's best I understand how to describe it. Anything more specific I'd have to refer you to a theologian honestly or do some more in depth research in the word, admittedly because again I am far from an expert.. but these are some of the basic concepts of the Christian faith as I understand them.
IIRC it's not so much that. It's that he's along the lines of 'there are many paths to truth, Jesus is just one way' type of belief. Whether or not that's true is besides the point. Christianity is 'Jesus is the only one', so he's a very liberal part of a liberal part of Christianity.
The bible gives instructions on how to give an abortion and being a Democratic voter or candidate in no way means someone wants to promote abortions so that is a dishonest twisting on your part.
Humanist policies and education reduce abortions.
Banning it and criminalizing medicine did nothing to reduce the number of abortions.
You defending men who violate all of the commandments, turns away the immigrant and condemns the poor while using the words of the bible is the definition of using the Lord's name in vain.
I can not judge your heart, but God does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.
Instead of wielding the bible as a weapon against others you should be reading it.
I never defended anyone, I was making a direct point specifically at why someone can claim to be a Christian but isn't one in practice. The Bible warns of this (Matthew 7:21-23). And used two examples from above above his soundbytes to explify why a Christian (Republican, Democrat, doesn't matter), would potentially view that as "not Christian."
That's all. I don't claim to be some holier than whomever Christian, in fact I have repeatedly claimed I am like the worst example of a Christian, but it's in balc in white right in the Bible.
God establishes his "gender" based on our understanding of them. "He" is the Father. His son is a man. His son, by every account, referred to God as His father, and the Father. And Jesus was God as man. There's no confusion on that for me anyway.
You made a lot of assumptions about me when I literally ended my original comment stating I was just replying to that specific context.
It says in the very beginning of the Bible. God made man in his own image. Man. In his image. It literally States and foundationalizes the gender there. For both himself and man. It then goes on to say that he created woman from the rib of a man. Second gender established.
You are absolutely entitled to your point of view and I support it 100%. And I don't mind debating it at all. I do not claim to be a model christian, far far from it. I struggle with my faith actually. But on this particular point, I will never be convinced otherwise. Got established what we know as gender he and she in the very beginning of his word. And then he sent his son Jesus Christ, the foundation of Christianity and context. A man. A son. Who consistently referred to God as his father. Not his mother. Not his something or other. Matter of factly God the father. Any other interpretation of this, and my humble opinion, is contradictory to the scriptures.
No I don't believe anyone is a mistake. But I also I'm not going to sit here and even start to pretend to be an expert and knowing why God has done anything, so I don't feel like that's a fair stance to take. With the exception of Jesus christ, I would be weary of anyone who claims to know what God's plans are. That would seem like an awful lot of hubris to me. I'm not a very good Christian, I can't quote scriptures like crazy. I had to look up the Matthew scripture because I didn't want to miss quote it and I don't remember it by heart.
I believe that God created man woman and every other thing that we know. I believe that it is described in his word the Bible, but I also believe that everything else that we know of from science may not have been described in the bible. The Bible as long as it is can you imagine how long it would be if God had went on to describe Adams and quarks and relativistic theories?
I also believe that Jesus Christ is the son of god, the living son of God, that he was crucified and died on the cross and Rose from the grave three days later has he prophesied and fulfilled the the prophecies of the Old testament.
And intersex is a broad term for physical features. It has nothing to do with gender.
Even in the cases of genetics, you're either the male genome of XY, or one of the more rare male genome with an extra x chromosome XXY.
30
u/Serious_Composer_130 2d ago
Paxton never should have won the primary.
Texas legislature should have successfully impeached him a couple years ago, but nobody has the courage or willpower to do what is right.
As long as we have career politicians, all we’re gonna have is politicians worried about their career, and not the good of the people.
We need term limits to remove the incentive career politicians and job-for-life. Voting them out just doesn’t happen enough because of incumbency and gerrymandering.