Bonnen probe on familiar track
Investigations of official impropriety take common course: first scandal, then fizzle
AUSTIN — If recent history is any indication, Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen has little to fear from a Texas Rangers investigation into allegations he offered a bribe to a conservative activist.
Investigators who have delved into accusations of impropriety against the state’s most powerful politicians over a 15-year period delivered just five cases that led to convictions. The Rangers inherited the public integrity caseload in 2015 and have yet to secure a conviction of a lawmaker at any level, records reviewed by the Houston Chronicle show.
Experts say these cases are difficult to prove, often caught in the gap between suspicious behavior and violations of law.
“Is this really a corrupt move, or was this just some stupid thing that a politician did or a cop did or just a normal citizen did? Usually it’s pretty clear,” said Johnny Sutton, a former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas from 2001 to 2009. “That’s why we tend to look for the real bribes, the cash-in-the-pocket type of activities, which there’s plenty of, even to this day here in Texas.”
Bonnen, of Brazoria County, and political ally Rep. Dustin Burrows, a Republican from Lubbock, are accused of furnishing activist Michael Quinn Sullivan with a list of 10 largely moderate GOP members for Empower Texans — his moneyed, conservative advocacy group — to target in the 2020 primary elections in exchange for granting the group coveted press credentials.
Sullivan secretly recorded the conversation and shared the roughly hourlong audio privately with select Republicans. He publicly shared details of the conversation on his organization’s web
site, including a list of the 10 members allegedly targeted and sundry demeaning comments Bonnen made about fellow House members.
Those who said they heard the audio confirmed some of Sullivan’s claims. Others, including Bonnen, are calling for the recording to be released to the public. The audio has since been turned over to the Rangers, according to Sullivan, and is being kept confidential.
Bonnen, a first-term speaker, and Burrows, thenchair of the House GOP Caucus, have denied the allegations but have confirmed the meeting happened.
The magic words
Investigators for the Rangers’ Public Integrity Unit will have to unearth facts to help a committee of lawmakers — and possibly a prosecutor — decide whether Bonnen offered a bribe or committed offenses such as official misconduct or retaliation. But that could be a difficult case to make.
Bonnen says he has no control over whether any group receives press credentials, which guarantee access to the House floor and lawmakers while they debate and vote on bills. The Texas Scorecard, which is affiliated with Empower Texans, has been denied the credentials in the past because Empower Texans makes millions of dollars in political donations, and House rules forbid interest groups from having them. But the credentials also seem to have little, if any, monetary value — one of several potential sticking points in the investigation.
Without having heard the tape, it’s difficult to determine exactly what Bonnen said and what the understanding was, said Buck Wood, a prominent ethics lawyer of more than 50 years. But investigators don’t need a “magic word” from Bonnen to determine whether the offer constitutes a bribe or threat, he said.
“All you have to do is ask someone to do something and, ‘If you do that, I will do something for you,’ ” Wood said. “You don’t have to say, ‘By the way, I want to give you a bribe.’ ”
Law enforcement experts say it is critical to have a strong case for such accusations to even make it to court. The Rangers thought they had one when they investigated state Rep. Dawnna Dukes, D-Austin, in 2016.
Investigating claims that Dukes made her state employees run personal errands for her and do campaign work on state time, the Rangers honed in on allegations she illegally collected from the state a $61.50 per diem for days she never stepped foot in the Capitol.
Dukes was indicted only for the case to later unravel. A key House administrator told the Rangers that Dukes’ practice violated House rules, but the investigators never obtained a sworn statement from him. The administrator later told Dukes’ attorney that lawmakers often collect those funds when they conduct state business and do not need to go to the Capitol. Prosecutors dropped the charges after two years of work.
Trivial or corrupt?
Gregg Cox spent 15 years heading up the Public Integrity Unit when it was part of the Travis County District Attorney’s Office. The team investigated Republican Congressman Tom DeLay of Houston for money laundering, South Texas Democratic Rep. Ismael “Kino” Flores for tampering with governmental records and perjury, and suburban Dallas Republican Rep. Joe Driver for abuse of official capacity. All three were convicted, along with a district court judge from Eagle Pass and a district attorney from Rockwall County. DeLay’s conviction was later overturned.
The Legislature pulled the funding for the Public Integrity Unit in 2013 amid a clash between Republican Gov. Rick Perry and the Democratic district attorney of Travis County. After two years without funding for investigations of political corruption, the Legislature revived the effort in 2015 but handed the responsibility — with little additional funding — to the Rangers.
With that change, lawmakers required public officials accused of wrongdoing to face prosecution in their home counties instead of where the alleged crime took place. The prospect of trying influential and popular politicians in the middle of their power bases makes prosecutions more difficult, said Cox, director of operations and assistant district attorney for Travis County.
“When a case is prosecuted in a county where the offense did not occur, it is very difficult for the public — which would include grand juries or trial juries in the county — to really feel a reason to be concerned about that,” said Cox.
Others say sending cases to a lawmaker’s hometown helps a prosecutor have a clear-eyed view on whether the findings reveal a trivial problem or genuine wrongdoing.
“Because they’re so damaging to the person accused, you really, really want to make sure there’s no doubt about the proof that the person actually did the crime,” said Sutton, the former DA for the Western District of Texas who is now in private practice in Austin. “The politician that just does something stupid, generally the people will sort that out in the next election.”
Or in some cases, the elected officials will pay back taxpayer funds they are accused of misspending.
Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, known for his white cowboy hat and rodeo championships, was the subject of a public integrity investigation in 2016.
The newly elected Republican commissioner was accused of illegally billing taxpayers and his campaign thousands of dollars in 2015 for out-of-state travel unrelated to the job. He traveled to Oklahoma where he obtained a so-called Jesus shot to cure back pain, then to Mississippi to compete in a rodeo two weeks later.
Miller said the reason for the Oklahoma trip was to meet with lawmakers and agriculture officials. Lawmakers there said they had a brief chat with Miller that began in a hallway. In Mississippi, Miller said he spoke with the state’s agriculture commissioner and campaign donors at the rodeo.
Miller later repaid the state $2,000 in flight and rental car costs. The Texas Ethics Commission fined him $500. The Travis County district attorney declined to prosecute, citing the repayments. Miller won reelection in 2018.
Cox, chief of the former public integrity unit, emphasized that these investigations are worthwhile even when they don’t result in charges.
“We conducted a number of investigations over the years that turned out to not be criminal offenses, but the remedial steps taken by the official or agency to stop a bad practice made for better government,” he said.
Potential for politics
While law enforcement officials say they have faith in the integrity of the Rangers and their investigating unit, others fear politics will color the results of the investigation of Bonnen.
“They’re very subject to political pressure. They really are,” said Wood, who has also worked in the state elections division and with the state comptroller. “I don’t want to paint with a broad brush. My experience has been (that) you can’t take a position that they’ll do what they should do.”
Chad Dunn, a civil rights attorney, said that information from Rangers investigations has too often been shielded from public view, and that some investigations did not consider all of the violations of the law alleged — three cases reviewed by the Houston Chronicle were redacted to the point that it’s not clear which official was under investigation.
In the Bonnen case, Dunn is representing the Texas Democratic Party, which filed a lawsuit about the meeting alleging Bonnen, Burrows and Sullivan violated civil campaign laws. The suit also seeks a copy of the audio recording.
“My experience is there’s some good Texas Rangers and there’s some not-good Texas Rangers. I have no way to know who was assigned here and what direction they were given,” Dunn said.
The Department of Public Safety did not respond to multiple requests for comment. It is not clear when the findings will be released.
One of the heavily redacted cases was apparently the investigation of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, accused of violating the state’s gift ban when he accepted $100,000 for his legal defense. Paxton was indicted by a grand jury in 2015 on securities fraud charges. Those charges are still pending. But no charges materialized from the inquiry into the $100,000 donation from James Webb, which was given to Paxton as Webb’s company faced a federal investigation that included assistance from the attorney general’s office.
Ultimately, Kaufman County District Attorney Erleigh Norville Wiley determined that Paxton had a prior attorney-client relationship with the donor, making the gift legal.
It is unclear when the Rangers will complete their investigation of Bonnen’s meeting.
But the controversy is still a liability for the speaker politically, said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston. Although Bonnen has won re-election to his district comfortably in recent years, lawmakers will have to decide if they want to give him a second term as speaker.
“The wound is still fresh and hasn’t been sutured. It can be a problem down the road if it doesn’t heal totally,” Rottinghaus said. “It’s hard to say he’s in serious danger or he’s totally safe.”