AG Paxton does what no ordinary citizen could
‘Cheaper’ for him
Regarding “Paxton’s office says whistleblower settlement would save Texas taxpayers money,” (Feb. 21): When Attorney General Ken Paxton says settling is “cheaper” he means cheaper for him. It’s not state taxpayers’ debt; it’s Paxton’s obligation as he, and he alone, benefited from his shenanigans. Texas taxpayers should not have to pay for his grift. Furthermore, Assistant Attorney General Chris Hilton was quoted as saying that “under the terms of the settlement, there is no admission of fault or liability or wrongdoing by any party.”
It’s sickeningly incredible that he will slip out of this one. No ordinary citizen could. Thank you Taylor Goldenstein and Houston Chronicle for this article.
Toy B. Halsey, Houston
It’s like watching a tennis match. First, in 2016 Ken Paxton, our indicted attorney general, wanted to use out-of-state gifts to cover his securities fraud legal fees (seven years of fees ... that must be a big tab). But the Texas Ethics Commission ruled that was illegal because the charges were not related to his job as an elected official.
Now, he wants the state to cover the $600,000 in legal fees he has racked up fighting his whistleblower lawsuit. Under the state’s election laws, he is allowed to use campaign funds to cover his legal defense because it relates to his elected position. The difference seems to be that in the whistleblower case, taxpayers can be his piggy bank.
Paxton originally appealed the whistleblower suit, claiming he was an elected official and not a state employee. But he is now advocating the use of state money rather than his election coffers to pay out the settlement. Were you able to follow the ball (or the money)?
Paxton’s office would have us believe that he cannot pay for his own mistakes. It states that “there is no whistleblower case where any individual has paid anything.”
Don’t we raise our kids to take responsibility for their actions? Did our AG miss this lesson?
Maybe someone can explain why taxpayers’ hard-earned $3.3 million should be used to pay off his criminal behavior rather than having Paxton pay for the consequences of his own actions. We are not backed into a corner here. Our legislators need to set an example of responsibility.
Judith Peek Lee, Beaumont