Miriam mom of 5 in anti Talarico ads
Miriam mom of 5 in anti Talarico ads
FASTLANE:
This "Fastlane" discussion may cover sensitive, inflammatory, or controversial topics.
See Fastlane guidelines »
Claiming that Paxton's office had nothing to do with it is false. Because Paxton heads the agency that fully structured, negotiated, and defended the plea deal, critics and lawmakers from both parties hold him responsible for its leniency. They aren't making it up just because of the Senate race; the public record of the written plea offer from his own prosecutors has fueled the backlash.
Sophos3 : You are not telling the truth. You know darn well I did not say Paxton's office had nothing to do with it.
MrsC67 : Some posit that the judge that conducted the impea.chmen trial manipulated the process. I'm not opining. I am not privy to smoke filled room wheeling and dealing.
The headlines I've provided came out around May 19th. Paxton didn't win the run off until May 26.
Sophos3 : lol
I also started reading about the impeachment. His legal team proved he was facing false accusations. The ad I saw showed a woman named Allison claiming Paxton's employees turned him to the FBI. They left it at that. But when the FBI investigated, the Biden Justice Department found there was no evidence of a crime. The employees claimed Nate Paul provided benefits to Paxton that were bribes. Mainly free home renovations. During the impeachment hearing Paxton's team showed that Paxton paid for water damage to his home and that no renovations were done. But here's the kicker. Despite that evidence of Paxton paying for the home repairs in question and no renovations actually being performed, all 12 Democrats still voted that he was guilty of the home renovation charge. Now they just claim he was impeached on it and do not admit Democrats voted him guilty without evidence Guilt without evidence? Explain that to me.
MrsC67 : Ok I'll explain and try and keep it simple. The home renovation charge hinges on two completely different interpretations of the exact same timeline. Paxton's defense team argued he was innocent by showing photos of an unrenovated kitchen and a $121,617 wire transfer proving he paid for the home repairs himself. All 12 Senate Democrats did not vote "without evidence"; they viewed the payment as a cover up because Paxton only sent the money on the exact day his whistleblowers went to the FBI. Because the money went to a contractor tied to donor Nate Paul, and emails showed Paul receiving project updates, those voting guilty concluded Paxton only paid the bill to hide a bribe after getting caught, though the senate ended up acquitted him of all charges. I'm amazed we are focusing only on this and not the indictment from 2015. There are so many things on the Paxton platter to pick from.
Some posit that the judge that conducted the impea.chmen trial manipulated the process.
Rapsalot : Sophos3 : We could be here all night. But I'm a slow reader and a worse speller. This is about my limit on typing conversations about these kind of discussions.
Sophos3 : You are not telling the truth. You know darn well I did not say Paxton's office had nothing to do with it. Paxton was basically the CEO. But the Judge does the sentencing. The judge could have sentenced to one year, but chose much less time.
MrsC67 : Paxton runs his office like a CEO... So, no accountability at the top? You do realize the judge gave the maximum he could right? Under Texas law, a judge cannot unilaterally sentence a defendant to a year in prison if the charge has been reduced. Who was in charge of that reduced sentence again?
Rapsalot : Sophos3 : We could be here all night. But I'm a slow reader and a worse speller. This is about my limit on typing conversations about these kind of discussions. I might resume tomorrow.
MrsC67 : Read up and relax. Let me know how it works out.
Sophos3 : lol I was off by 7 days? The polling was already showing Paxton as the likely winner.
MrsC67 : Off by 7 days is still a factor. It doesn't help the narrative so let's continue to ignore it because timelines mean nothing when it comes to crime and punishment.
MrsC67 : I am the bad speller. Don't steal my thuner.
Sophos3 : I recall reading a great description of the paramour's clicking heels as she arrived to the Capitol to testify. She was told to return to whence she came without a chance for the dramatic scene. Florid writing it was.
Sophos3 : You ignored the sequence I described. Yes she agreed. Her quote was after she previously agreed, as I described.
MrsC67 : I didn't ignore it, I tried to keep it concise and the explanation simple. Sure, the mother initially agreed to a resolution to spare her son a second trial, framing her final objection as a delayed afterthought misrepresents the reality of the whole event. Her quote condemning the deal was delivered directly to the judge at the final sentencing hearing, precisely because Paxton's office altered the plea language to omit the victim's age, which entirely shielded the abuser from having to register as a sex offender. Her initial agreement was given under the impression that prosecutors were seeking proper accountability, but she withdrew her support the moment she realized the AG's office had structured a loophole filled misdemeanor package that entirely bypassed Texas sex offender laws. If that's what you mean by ignore, my apologies for not spelling it out in better detail the first time. Anyhow sleep well.
MrsC67 : You really keeping stretching that "victim didn't want to testify" ..... keep forgetting to mention the accused admitted to sexually abusing that boy for several years.
JerryJustice : What are you talking about??
PTSD isn't a ride in the park. TodayI had aguy break down st the mere mention of a more benign situation.
Rapsalot : Did u get a box of wine and repent?
kingwooddiscgolf : I have neve r bought or had boxed wine except in a sangria my daughter made. Why ask that?
FASTLANE:
This "Fastlane" discussion may cover sensitive, inflammatory, or controversial topics.
See Fastlane guidelines »
Views: 1,049
# Replies: 53