Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

February 18th, 2023:

Paxton federal corruption probe moved to DOJ

This is a little confusing at first, but it has some good news in there.

The only criminal involved

Justice Department officials in Washington have taken over the corruption investigation into Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, removing the case from the hands of the federal prosecutors in Texas who’d long been leading the probe.

The move was disclosed in a statement by state prosecutors handling their own case against Paxton. It’s the latest development in the federal investigation into the attorney general, who came under FBI scrutiny in 2020 after his own top deputies accused him of bribery and abusing his office to help one of his campaign contributors, who also employed a woman with whom Paxton acknowledged having had an extramarital affair.

The investigation of the three-term Republican is now being led by the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, which prosecutes allegations of official misconduct against elected leaders at the local, state and federal level. The U.S. attorney’s office in Texas was recently recused from the complex case after working on it for years — an abrupt change that came within days of Paxton agreeing to apologize and pay $3.3 million in taxpayer money to four of the former staffers who reported him to the FBI.

State prosecutors working on a separate securities fraud case against Paxton — Brian Wice and Kent Schaffer — said in a statement to The Associated Press on Thursday that they were notified of the move. They referred all questions to the Justice Department, which declined to comment.

It’s not known whether Paxton will face charges, although federal investigators in Texas who had worked the case believed there was sufficient evidence for an indictment, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the ongoing probe.

It was not immediately clear what prompted top Justice Department officials to recuse the federal prosecutors in West Texas but the move was pushed for by Paxton’s attorneys. One of his defense lawyers, Dan Cogdell, said Thursday that he’d previously appealed to agency officials to take the case out of the hands of the local U.S. attorney’s office, which he said had “an obvious conflict” because of the overlapping allegations and investigations that led to the probe of Paxton.

Eight of Paxton’s senior staff accused him of crimes in 2020 after the attorney general hired an outside lawyer to look into an Austin real-estate developer’s claims of wrongdoing by FBI agents and federal prosecutors who were separately investigating the developer. Those agents and lawyers are part of the same federal prosecutorial district as the ones who came to investigate Paxton.

“It was the right thing to do,” said Cogdell. He said federal officials had not informed him of the move and declined to comment further.

The overlap was known to officials within the Justice Department and publicly reported on by the AP within weeks of Paxton’s staff going to the FBI. Nonetheless, the agency left the investigation to be led by a career federal prosecutor based in San Antonio, who was previously best known for winning a money laundering and fraud case against a Democratic state senator.

It’s good and more than a little interesting to get an update on this story, especially given that I was despairing about the lack of information just a few days ago. I was a bit puzzled by this at first because I have thought about the probe into Paxton’s dealings with Nate Paul – which among other things led to the whole whistleblower saga and the settlement of same that just happened – as an “FBI investigation”. For sure, the FBI is a key player, but of course there is a prosecutor associated with it as well. Someone – several someones, really – has to believe that there may be a viable prosecution at the end of this, or it would be terminated, as there are other fish to be fried. The original someone was in the San Antonio office of the US Attorney, but as noted that office is also investigating Nate Paul, and since Paxton is an elected official there could be a conflict of interest there. To be honest, I’m unclear what that might be – either there’s evidence of a crime or there’s not – but if it’s the norm for these matters to be overseen in Washington by the Justice Department instead of by the local USA, then fine.

Two points to mention here. One is that this is evidence that the investigation in question is still active, and if the unnamed sources are to be believed, there is a future in which Paxton faces federal indictment, which should be a lot harder for him to stonewall and weasel out of, at least without an ally in the White House who can put a thumb on the scale for him. When that might be, God and maybe Merrick Garland only know. But at least it’s still out there. The fear was that the investigation had come to an end, as these things sometimes do, with nothing to show for it and no reason to make a news story of it.

And two, one way of reading this story is that it’s a story in the first place because the long-stonewalled prosecutors of the state case against Paxton mentioned it to a reporter. Maybe the AP heard about this transfer of the investigation on their own and reached out to Brian Wice and Kent Schaffer for a comment even though they don’t have anything to do with the federal case. It’s a plausible interpretation, they’d surely say something if they had something to say, and everyone knows about the state case that has dragged on since approximately the second Reagan administration. I just find it curious enough to wonder. For sure, getting this out there now, right after the whistleblower case was settled and Paxton got to do a bit of a victory dance, was a way to remind everyone that he still faces a lot of potential trouble, and maybe dampens his mood a little. I am 100% speculating here, I could be completely off base. I’m just saying this is what came to mind when I read that paragraph.

Anyway, whatever came to your mind, there’s more at Daily Kos, the Trib, and the Chron. If we do hear more about this case going forward, that would be nice.

Wendy Davis’ lawsuit against SB8 dismissed

Alas.

Wendy Davis

A federal judge has dismissed a narrow challenge to Texas’ ban on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. The lawsuit was brought by former State Sen. Wendy Davis, best known for her 13-hour filibuster of a 2013 abortion bill.

The lawsuit, filed in April, challenges the 2021 Texas law known as Senate Bill 8, which allows private citizens to sue anyone who “aids or abets” in an abortion after fetal cardiac activity is detected, usually around six weeks of pregnancy.

The law is “blatantly unconstitutional” and “make[s] a mockery of the federal courts,” Davis’ lawsuit alleged.

The law was designed to be difficult to challenge in court, since no government entities are involved in enforcement. Abortion advocates have struggled to find a way to block the law that doesn’t require them to first violate it and risk a costly civil lawsuit.

In this case, Davis and others sued a handful of anti-abortion activists who have threatened to bring civil lawsuits against abortion funds that help Texans access abortion out-of-state. These threats contributed to a “chilling effect” on the funds’ operations, and individuals have lost their ability to freely associate with like-minded individuals, the suit said.

The original complaint also named state Rep. Briscoe Cain, R-Deer Park, who sent cease-and-desist letters to abortion funds, threatening criminal prosecution under the state’s abortion ban. An amended complaint, filed in August, removed Cain from the list of defendants.

U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman dismissed the suit Wednesday, finding that Davis and the other plaintiffs “have not articulated a credible, imminent threat that can be attributed to Defendants.”

The defendants have filed court petitions seeking to depose leaders from two other abortion funds to learn about possible prohibited abortions. But as part of this lawsuit, the defendants signed sworn declarations saying they did not intend to sue Davis or the other plaintiffs.

“If anything, the specificity of these petitions lessens the threats’ immediacy,” Pitman wrote. “In short, Plaintiffs have not sufficiently distinguished these threats and the sworn statements disavowing them to show an injury.”

See here for the background and here for a copy of the order. It seems that the original SCOTUS ruling on SB8 means that there’s not a clear avenue for being proactive against the possibility of being sued under that cursed law. To quote from the ruling, “S.B. 8 was designed to evade judicial review so that a plaintiff likely could only challenge the law by subjecting themselves to liability.” Because these defendants have made sworn statements that they won’t sue these specific plaintiffs, there’s nothing to adjudicate and thus the suit is dismissed for lack of standing. Note, as Judge Pitman does, that this remains the case even though two of the named defendants have taken legal action against other abortion funds. You can’t prevent someone from suing you under this law, you can only react if they do. What a world we live in now.

Tesla autopilot crash mystery solved

It wasn’t on autopilot after all.

Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board apparently have solved the mystery of why no one was found behind the steering wheel of a Tesla that crashed near The Woodlands two years ago, killing two men.

The agency said in an investigative report released Wednesday on the fiery April 17, 2021 crash that Dr. William Varner, who was driving a Tesla 2019 Model S, apparently moved to the back seat after slamming into the car’s front air bag, deforming the steering wheel in the crash.

The crash occurred less than 600 feet from where Varner, 59, and Everette Talbot, 69, began their trip in Varner’s driveway along Hammock Dunes Place in Carlton Woods Creekside, a private gated community. Both men were killed in the crash and related fire that significantly damaged the car.

Although the crash raised questions about whether the car was operating on Tesla’s “Autopilot” partially automated driving system, the NTSB determined that the system could not have been used on the street where the crash happened due to lack of lane lines. Testing showed the car’s “Traffic Aware Cruise Control” system could have been used, although it would only work up to the maximum speed on the road, 30 mph, the report said.

The 2019 Tesla reached 67 mph two seconds before hitting the second of two trees at 57 mph before being consumed by flames as the lithium-ion battery caught fire.

The Tesla’s event data recorder showed that the accelerator moved “consistent with driver activity” in the five seconds before the crash, and that the driver’s seat belt was connected when the crash happened.

“Although the driver’s seat was found vacant and the driver was found in the left rear seat, the available evidence suggests that the driver was seated in the driver’s seat at the time of the crash and moved into the rear seat postcrash,” the report said.

The agency found that excessive speed and failure to control the car due to alcohol impairment caused the crash. The report says testing by a Federal Aviation Administration lab found that Varner had a blood-alcohol level of 0.151 grams per deciliter, almost twice the Texas legal limit of 0.08. Two over-the-counter sedating antihistamine medications also were found in the Varner’s blood, according to the report.

See here, here, and here for the background. In the end, it was a run-of-the-mill DUI with some weird effects. There are reasons to be concerned about Tesla’s autopilot feature – especially this week – and indeed of autonomous vehicles in general, but this is not evidence of such concerns. At least now we know.