.

ad test

Monday, August 18, 2014

A Correction That I am Happy to Make

In yesterday's post about the indictment against Rick Perry, I suggested that the indictment for abuse of official power against Rick Perry, I supported the outcome, but was dubious on the actual law.

Well, I was wrong. Both the facts and the law support this indictment.

First, in addition to his public pronouncements, Governor Goodhair called the Travis County DA to threaten the veto:

When Lehmberg refused to resign, Perry threatened to veto funding of her Public Integrity Unit—which investigates corruption of local, state, and federal public officials. Sources close to the investigation told me that Perry’s threat happened as the unit’s prosecutors were investigating whether Perry’s political backers and campaign contributors had received preferential and improper treatment in receiving grants from an anti-cancer state agency, the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas.

……… (Run of the mill Texas corruption snipped)

When Lehmberg refused to resign, Perry threatened to veto funding of her Public Integrity Unit—which investigates corruption of local, state, and federal public officials. Sources close to the investigation told me that Perry’s threat happened as the unit’s prosecutors were investigating whether Perry’s political backers and campaign contributors had received preferential and improper treatment in receiving grants from an anti-cancer state agency, the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas.
Making public statements and publicly threatening a veto is one thing, but the behind the scenes machinations and contacts by his evil minions appear to be a direct threat against the office that is investigating him.

And then there is the legal precedent:
The closest precedent dates back to 1917, when Gov. James Ferguson, who wanted the University of Texas to fire some faculty and staff of which he disapproved, was indicted based on his veto of funding to the university. Ferguson resigned before he was convicted. "There's not really any legal or political precedent for this. You've got to go back nearly a century," Jillson said.
I think that the case is far stronger than is made out in Politico.

The case against Perry is a lot stronger than against Ferguson, because those college professors were not investigating him and his, and DA Lehmberg is investigating him and his.

I still think that it is a tough case to prove unless the DA turns one of Perry's evil minions, but I do think that it is a winnable case.

No comments: