Ken Paxton and aides ordered to answer questions under oath in whistleblower case The four whistleblowers asked the court last month to force the attorney general and his aides to sit for deposition, which would require them to answer questions under oath related to the allegations of bribery and corruption. https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/20/ken-paxton-whistleblower-lawsuit/
Texas DA Ken Paxton says he'll accept judgment, won't contest facts in whistleblower lawsuit. The catch? Apparently he's still not admitting guilt, and is trying to maneuver things so he doesn't have to submit a deposition under oath. Ken Paxton says he'll accept judgment, won't contest facts in whistleblower case https://abc13.com/ken-paxton-whistleblower-case-texas-attorney-general-lawsuit/14340222/ Attorney General Ken Paxton sought Thursday to end the long-running whistleblower lawsuit against him - and avoid sitting for a deposition - by saying he would no longer contest the facts of the case and was prepared to accept any judgment. The move came after he appeared to exhaust his options to reverse a Travis County judge's order that he and three top aides answer questions under oath. The all-GOP Texas Supreme Court ruled against Paxton on that issue last week. Paxton's office portrayed Thursday's move as one that would finally put an end to a costly and distracting lawsuit, in which his former top deputies allege they were illegally fired for reporting the attorney general to law enforcement alleging abuses of office. But a lawyer for one of the whistleblowers said the lawsuit was "not over," and Paxton was just trying to delay it further. "Today, my office acted to end this wasteful litigation by filing an amended answer that - consistent with the previous decision to settle this case - will enable the trial court to enter a final judgment without any further litigation," Paxton said in a statement. He added that he "will not allow my office to be distracted by these disgruntled former employees and their self-serving sideshow." With his latest court filing, Paxton is essentially dropping his denial that he violated the Texas Whistleblowers Act - one of the allegations that the Texas Senate acquitted him in his impeachment trial last year. The filing emphasized that it should not be "construed as an admission" of guilt by Paxton or his office. State Rep. Andrew Murr, the Junction Republican who was the top House impeachment manager, claimed vindication after Paxton's new filing, saying he has "dropped all pretense of innocence." "He's admitted to what many in the Texas House have known in our hearts to be true: he flagrantly broke the law, violated the Whistleblower Act and betrayed the trust placed in him by retaliating against his own team, those who bravely reported his illegal actions," Murr said in a statement. Whether Paxton's reversal in the courts actually ends the case remains to be seen. The whistleblower's lawyer, Tom Nesbitt, said Paxton's latest maneuver is "another desperate stunt by Ken Paxton to prevent the truth from coming out." "Ken Paxton has never answered questions about his illegal and corrupt conduct," Nesbitt said. "He is clearly terrified of doing so - even if it means taking a different position now about him breaking the law than he did at his impeachment trial." The whistleblowers - four former top deputies - filed suit against Paxton in 2020, alleging they were improperly fired for reporting him to the FBI. They said they believed he was misusing his office to help his friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The whistleblowers almost settled with Paxton for $3.3 million early last year, but state lawmakers balked at using taxpayers dollars for the settlement and the House chose to investigate the underlying claims, leading to Paxton's impeachment. The Senate acquitted Paxton after a trial in September, and the whistleblower lawsuit resumed. The whistleblowers' claims have also been under federal investigation. Paxton has spent the months since the impeachment trial trying to derail the revived whistleblower lawsuit, arguing it was already effectively settled, even though the Legislature still had not funded the $3.3 million. But multiple judges have rejected that argument, and last month, a Travis County district judge ordered that the case move forward with depositions. Paxton announced Thursday's filing on the radio show of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, saying his office has decided "we're not playing this game anymore." "Give us whatever liability you think we have, whatever damages," Paxton said. "The end result is the Legislature has already ... said they're not paying anything and so there's no reason for us to let them harass my office when we're dealing with all these immigration issues and suing Pfizer and we've got this huge Google lawsuit." The whistleblowers have said they are intent on having their day in court and want to see Paxton answer questions under oath. "We are not going away," one whistleblower, Blake Brickman, said at a news conference after Paxton's Senate acquittal. "For us this case has always been about more than money. It's about truth. It's about justice."
Still under felony indictment Texas AG Ken Paxton, spent $2.3 Million on legal fees. Texas AG Ken Paxton spent $2.3M in campaign cash on legal fees from impeachment https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...sh-on-legal-fees-from-impeachment/ar-AA1ncLmM
Judge again rejects AG Ken Paxton's motion to block his deposition in whistleblower case https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/j...-deposition-in-whistleblower-case/ar-BB1hgNjR
Texas Supreme Court pauses depositions in Paxton whistleblower case The ruling by the all-Republican court came after former President Donald Trump told justices to leave Paxton alone. https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/30/ken-paxton-texas-supreme-court-whistleblowers/
AG Ken Paxton back in court Friday in securities fraud case https://www.heraldpalladium.com/new...cle_d15b09ba-36cc-5b4e-b274-34133091e508.html
Judge rejects Texas AG Ken Paxton’s request to throw out nearly decade-old criminal charges https://apnews.com/article/ken-paxton-texas-houston-7a2fcdd3951050a2298e83cb5d18ef9b
Paxton loses again in court, endlessly wasting tax payer dollars. Texas court dismisses Paxton lawsuit against Yelp over crisis pregnancy center labeling https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...t-yelp-over-crisis-pregnancy-center-labeling/ A district court in the state of Texas has dismissed a lawsuit brought by Attorney General Ken Paxton against Yelp, after he claimed the company misled the public that crisis pregnancy centers in the state offer limited services. A judge in Bastrop County dismissed “with prejudice” all claims against Yelp in an order filed Wednesday. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, Yelp began notifying users that crisis pregnancy centers “typically provide limited medical services and may not have licensed medical professionals onsite.” Paxton sued Yelp last September, arguing that the language was misleading. Yelp, which is represented by the law firm Haynes and Boone, LLP, changed its language to say “Crisis Pregnancy Centers do not offer abortions or referrals to abortion providers.” The Texas attorney general argued that the review site violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practice Act for “inaccurate and misleading language.” Paxton’s lawsuit said the company can’t mislead the public because it “disagrees with our state’s abortion laws.” Yelp preemptively sued Paxton last year in federal court in the Northern District of California, in an effort to get the state lawsuit tossed. It was dismissed under a Supreme Court precedent that prevents federal courts from hearing a case by someone being prosecuted in state court. Yelp is appealing the dismissal of its federal lawsuit. In an emailed statement, a Yelp spokesperson said the company is pleased with the Bastrop County judge’s decision “that this meritless lawsuit should not have been brought in Texas.” “The trust and safety of our users is one of Yelp’s top priorities, which is why we take extensive measures to provide consumers with relevant and reliable information when they search for local businesses on our platform,” the spokesperson said. “This is especially critical when people are searching for healthcare services on Yelp.” The company vowed to continue “vigorously” defending constitutionally protected rights and fight government officials who try to censor truthful information from consumers. “The First Amendment exists to prevent government officials like Mr. Paxton from suppressing true statement they may dislike – whether that be just in Texas or, in the case of Mr. Paxton’s prosecution of Yelp, anywhere that Yelp applies to the notice,” the statement said. The company said Paxton’s lawsuit “sets a dangerous precedent” by using his power and office as a government official “to politicize and punish speech on issues that he disagrees with.” The Hill has reached out to Paxton’s office for comment about the dismissal.
Eventually this will come back and bite Paton in the ass. After impeachment acquittal, Texas AG Ken Paxton is out for revenge The Republican has endorsed more than 70 candidates in the March 5 primary, mostly backing those who voted against his impeachment or are challenging those who did. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...achment-endorsements-texas-primary-rcna140705