House panel hears details of complaints against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

A Texas House investigations committee expressed shock and disgust Wednesday as investigators presented evidence in what they described as a decadelong pattern of illegal and unethical behavior by state Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has been under criminal indictment for more than seven years over allegations of securities fraud.

The three-hour hearing Wednesday uncovered little evidence that had not already surfaced in Paxton’s many legal troubles, but it was noteworthy because it came before a House panel with authority to initiate formal disciplinary action against the state’s top attorney and highest-ranking elected law enforcement official.

The panel’s chairman, Rep. Andrew Murr, sidestepped reporters' questions on the potential for punishment, but during the hearing, after the investigators methodically recited their findings, he did not hide his displeasure.

"That's a pretty comprehensive list of concerns that are alarming to hear," said Murr, R-Junction. "It curls my moustache."

The evidence against Paxton ran the gamut on his legal and personal woes, from a 2015 state securities case, for which he remains indicted on three counts; to an extramarital affair that he tried to keep from his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton; to an ongoing federal investigation into his connection to a campaign donor, Austin real estate developer Nate Paul.

Investigators also detailed an ongoing whistleblower lawsuit brought against Ken Paxton in 2020 by four former aides who claim they were fired from his office after they alerted federal authorities that the attorney general might have committed crimes by intervening into multiple legal matters involving Paul.

Investigators say they spoke to 15 people who had worked in Paxton’s office. All but one expressed fear that they’d experience retaliation for their cooperation.

Although a possible impeachment never came up, it appears as if the House General Investigating Committee might be building a case against Paxton to present before the full House for formal discipline. If the House signs off on articles of impeachment, a trial would be held in the Senate, where a conviction requires two-thirds support. But it's uncertain if Paxton's job is in trouble, as state law says an officer may not be removed from office for an act committed before the officer's election to office.

After the hearing’s public portion, the committee retired to a private room where they emerged after an hour without providing an update. Murr spoke briefly with reporters, but he declined to answer specific questions. He did, however, say he might speak about the case publicly later.

Though it’s uncertain how aggressively they’ll push their investigation, especially given Paxton’s propensity for delay tactics in his other legal matters, the panel has shown teeth in other matters. Earlier this month, the committee recommended that the House expel state Rep. Bryan Slaton, R-Royse City, after an investigation found he had inappropriate sexual conduct with a 19-year-old aide in his office after providing her alcohol. House members accepted the recommendation and voted unanimously to expel Slaton from office.

Wednesday's hearing had the appearance of an initial proceeding, not a conclusion, as the House panel must now decide what to do with the information it received. A day earlier, in an urgently scheduled meeting, the committee moved to uncover additional evidence in voting unanimously to issue subpoenas to Paxton and his office. The committee also issued a preservation letter to Paxton requiring his office to keep all records related to the inquiry.

Though made public this week, the Paxton investigation began quietly in March, shortly after Paxton asked a House committee to pay a $3.3 million settlement with public money to resolve his whistleblower lawsuit. Paxton, as per the settlement, was also to issue a statement accepting that the former employees acted in a matter that they thought was right and apologize for calling them “rogue employees.” But, after Paxton refused to a deadline to secure the settlement funding by the end of this legislative session, which wraps up Monday, the whistleblowers backed out. The case remains pending.

Analyzing evidence in what is shown on their agenda as “Matter A", the committee’s three Republicans and two Democrats were often aghast, as if they heard for the first time allegations against Paxton that that have been public for years.

After the most damning evidence, Murr often interrupted the lawyers and had them repeat themselves or summarize portions of the testimony to emphasize their concerns. After a lawyer informed the panel that Paxton might be violating state law by potentially having a homestead exemption on two properties, Murr responded, “Duly noted.” That allegation had not previously been disclosed publicly.

Paxton, who won reelection to a third term last year, did not appear at the hearing. Instead, as it began, he appeared on a conservative radio show based in Dallas-Fort Worth, and renewed a day-old fight with House Speaker Dade Phelan.

“I think everybody knows (Phelan) was drunk,” Paxton told radio host Mark Davis. “The video speaks to itself. I believe there will be more videos. I think there are more videos out there.”

On Tuesday, Paxton issued a statement alleging Phelan, the two-term speaker, was intoxicated on the job and called for him to resign at the end of the session. A video surfaced over the weekend that showed Phelan unsteady and slurring his words as he conducted House business on Friday. Phelan’s office, which has not commented directly on the video, in response said Paxton was deflecting attention from his own behavior ahead of the House panel's hearing.

Paxton, in a statement posted on his Twitter account Wednesday, called Phelan, R-Beaumont, a “liberal.” He did not address the specific allegations against him the committee was hearing.

"The liberal leadership of the Texas House has routinely killed conservative legislation including important bills which would help secure our border and protect the integrity of our elections," Paxton said.

He added that Phelan and the committee are seeking to "sabotage" his work and called the testimony "false" and "highly partisan."

Adrian Shelley, head of the left-leaning government watchdog group Public Citizen's Texas chapter, said Paxton is unfit to continue in office.

“Ken Paxton must resign immediately," Shelley said. "But if he refuses to go willingly, the Texas Legislature must act to remove him. A running series of scandals and an alleged pattern of corruption have clouded Paxton's entire time in office. The people of Texas simply can’t trust that he is working for their interests, not his.”

The four criminal white-collar lawyers investigating Paxton have over 100 years of law experience: Erin Epley, Mark Donnelly, Terese Buess and Donna Cameron. Epley is the team leader.

The former Paxton aides who blew the whistle on Paxton are the source for much of what the investigation uncovered. Rehashing allegations from their lawsuit, they told investigators that Paxton used his office in an improper attempt to impede a federal investigation into Paul's actions. The investigators said the attorney general sought to give Paul access to confidential material associated with search warrants connected with the inquiry and, after his Paxton's lawyers dismissed Paul’s allegations as meritless, the attorney general hired an outside lawyer over objections of senior staff members and offered to pay him with public money to investigate the feds. That lawyer, Brandon Cammack, of Houston, had been practicing law for only five years.

Cammack, the panel said, had close ties to Paul and had improperly sought dozens of grand jury subpoenas in a Paul-related matter and falsely presented himself as a "special prosecutor" although the attorney general has no such office.

Even after Paxton told staff members that he personally hired Cammack, staff members moved to rein in the contract lawyer's authority and had the subpoenas he sought quashed.

"The actions were grossly outside of the line of established norms," said Donnelly, one of the investigating lawyers. "And as we've been able to determine, based on our investigation, the only beneficiary of the fruits of the investigation, notwithstanding its lack of legal or credible basis would have been Nate Paul."

Paxton, the investigators said, also inappropriately intervened on behalf of Paul in a lawsuit against a nonprofit and pressured attorney general staff members to draft legal documents to stall foreclosures on Paul properties.

Paxton told members of his staff he was interceding on Paul's behalf because he believed his friend was being "railroaded" and did not want to help state and federal agencies in that effort.

"Did you just say, I want to be very clear that the attorney general for the state of Texas said he did not want to use this office to help law enforcement?" Murr asked with amazement.

The investigator affirmed the allegation.

The former attorney general's office aides told investigators that, for his efforts, Paxton might have received a home renovation funded by Paul. Also, investigators said, Paul hired Paxton’s mistress for a job at his company.

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Investigators: Whistleblowers, many on Paxton's staff feared reprisals