Harris County Cop Accused Of Robbing Local Asian Businesses While in Uniform

$upport via Cash App

Harris County Precinct 4 Deputy Constable Bobby Espinoza running away from KPRC2 Reporters in what appears to be an industrial Tyvek suit(04/16/22)

A shocking report by Houston’s KPRC2 TV station(04/16/22) says a Deputy Constable with the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s office, was arrested and charged with felony theft over a months-long scheme(09/2021-03/2022) that involved him harassing and robbing four local Vietnamese businesses. What has shocked Houston residents even more, is the fact that he is alleged to have committed these crimes while in his uniform, and using his patrol unit–all reasonable indicators of a hardened criminal.

KPRC2 reporter Bill Barajas specifically said: “Not only is Bobby Espinosa alleged to have taken thousands from area businesses, he is alleged to have done it while in uniform and in his patrol unit…Espinosa, a Deputy Constable with the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s office, was arrested and charged with felony theft…He has bonded out on a $30,000 bond…Espinosa, wearing a mask and in all white, was quiet. He refused to answer my questions before disappearing underneath a nearby bridge. Court documents obtained by KPRC say Espinosa was with the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s office for seven and a half years. He is accused of demanding a total of $5,700 from four Vietnamese businesses in our area, the scheme allegedly starting in September of 2021, and lasting through March of this year. A probable cause court judge said Espinosa would make customers at the businesses leave, unplug surveillance cameras, and force employees to open up the cash register. He is also alleged to have pried open a game machine.”

Reasonable people will agree that given the fact that this was a months-long scheme, plus done while in his official uniform, there is reason to believe deputy constable Espinosa may have engaged in other criminal conduct during his seven year tenure at Harris County Pct4. It also raises some serious questions about the state of affairs at the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s office. Often times shocking stories like these involving police officers, are usually symptoms of much bigger problems at the police department. Did his peers, for example, know what he was doing, but chose to look the other way? Prior to these criminal charges, was Espinosa ever the subject of a complaint from the public and/or disciplinary action? Was it for similar conduct?

Bottom line folks, these are questions that need to be raised with the Harris County Constable’s office as this shocking case plays out in the courts. Yours Truly, a resident of Precinct 4, will certainly keep up with this shocking case to make sure that Deputy Constable Espinosa is not a symptom of much bigger problems at the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s office. And if it turns out that he is, then other heads need to roll.

**Updated on 04/19/22 to include formal response by Harris County Precinct 4 Constable Mark Herman, to the news of Bobby Espinosa’s arrest**

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com.com

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo Slams Case Against Her Staffers As “Flimsy, Unsubstantiated”

$upport via Cash App

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo appeared on Houston’s ABC13 TV station (04/14/22), where she slammed the recent criminal indictments of three of her top staffers for corruption. The allegation which led to the indictments, is that Judge Hidalgo’s office funneled an $11 million COVID contract to her pal, despite other more qualified bidders. She totally denies these allegations, and dismissed the subsequent indictments of her top staffers, telling ABC13’s Steve Campion that this was a “flimsy, unsubstantiated case”.

You’ll remember Yours Truly recently wondered aloud as to why the criminal prosecution of these three senior Hidalgo staffers was playing out during the thick and thin of her reelection campaign? It’s a troubling question that at some point, will need to be addressed.

Judge Hidalgo specifically told ABC13’s Steve Campion: “I think it’s a very flimsy unsubstantiated case…At best this is going forward with a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts and at worst, it’s the weaponization of the criminal justice system for political purposes, so I’m not going to play into that. My staffers are hardworking people. They work day and night for the people of Harris County.”

Asked whether she’s worried about being indicted, Judge Hidalgo responded, “No. I mean look, I don’t know how far this is going to go, and it’s very easy if you present one side of facts to a grand jury, everybody knows a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if that’s all they see, right?..I’m not scared, I’m not losing any sleep over this. Whatever happens I’m ready for it. I’m tough, I’m battle-tested, this is just politics, and you know we’ll face it, we’ll keep working, but I think it’s clear the community sees through this, and I’ve got work to do.”

There’s no other way to interpret Judge Hidalgo’s remarks on ABC13 other than, she considers the corruption allegations not only meritless, but also more importantly, part of a well orchestrated political attack masquerading as a criminal prosecution. Her “weaponization of the criminal justice system for political purposes” statement says it all.

Bottom line folks, Judge Hidalgo is absolutely correct. It is impossible to ignore the deep political undertones, given the close proximity of this “criminal prosecution” to the date she is scheduled to face voters at the polls(November). I don’t know who needs to hear this, but the Harris County District Attorney is a Democrat.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Fox News Sunday Host Grills Texas AG Ken Paxton About His Felony Indictments

$upport via Cash App

At his appearance on Fox News Sunday(11/14/21), Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was confronted with a question about his felony indictments, which his 2022 Republican primary challenger George P. Bush(Jeb’s son) argues, renders Paxton unfit for public office. A-G Paxton’s rattled and incoherent response to host Chris Wallace’s direct question shows that he did not expect such a question from Fox News.

A-G Paxton’s full interview on Fox News Sunday is available here, but the relevant clip is below.

Host Chris Wallace: “You face your own legal problems…You are under indictment on an allegation of securities fraud and you are also the subject of an FBI investigation because some former top officials in your own office accused you of bribery. George P. Bush, the son of Jeb Bush is running against you next year…Here’s what he says:’Our top lawyer needs to be above reproach. There shouldn’t even be a question of one’s character and competence for this important role.’ How big a problem do you think these allegations against you will be in your effort to win reelection?”

AG Paxton: “Look, I’ve been dealing with this kind of fight. When you go out and do the type of things that I’ve done, you are going to be challenged, you are going to have issues like this pop up. This happened 7 years ago, almost 7 years ago, I was reelected when it happened, and I think we’ve done a great job defending the state of Texas. That’s what I’m going to talk about…I’m going to continue doing my job.”

A-G Paxton’s rattled and incoherent response to this valid question basically boils down to (1) his felony indictments are the result of some vast left wing conspiracy, and (2) the fact that he got reelected even with the indictments means he’s innocent–both of which are bogus. In the eyes of the Texas public, it is A-G Paxton who’s the beneficiary of political favors. Simply put, no regular Texan would still be waiting for a criminal trial stemming from 7 year old indictments. Unless and until A-G Paxton’s indictments are resolved, either by being quashed, or by Paxton beating them at trial, he is simply not fit to continue serving as Texas’ top lawyer.

Bottom line folks, there was a time not very long ago, when public officials would swiftly resign if their character had been credibly called into question. Nothing credibly calls one’s character into question more than felony indictments. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton should save the Lone Star State from any further embarrassment by either stepping down now, or scrapping his reelection plans. There are many capable indictment-free Texans who can serve as Attorney General.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Can A Sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice Be Indicted?

As Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections heats up and more and more evidence continues to pop up indicating that then presidential candidate Trump was either fully aware of or an active participant in the interference, legal eagles are grappling with the question as to whether a sitting U.S. President can be indicted.

As it currently stands, according to many of the legal eagle pundits on cable TV, the answer to that question is no. There is apparently a Department of Justice(DOJ) policy that advises against indicting a sitting president. The pundits are quick to point out however that this is only a directive that can be changed at any time(not set in stone). Respected legal scholars like Harvard University’s Lawrence Tribe have argued against this DOJ directive saying nothing in the U.S. constitution prohibits a sitting president from being indicted if he is found to have committed crimes.

Strangely missing from the “to indict or not to indict” debate however is the equally important question as to whether a sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice can be indicted. We are of course talking about recently confirmed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh who as you will remember was the subject of numerous serious judicial complaints. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts referred the judicial complaints to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals for resolution.

A judicial council at the 10th Circuit Court recently dismissed all the complaints against Kavanaugh concluding that even though the allegations were serious, the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaints because Kavanaugh was no longer a federal appeals judge and thus not subject to the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act that deals with disciplining federal district court judges, magistrates and circuit appellate justices. Essentially, because Kavanaugh had been elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act no longer applied to him.

It is very important to point out that among the serious accusations against Kavanaugh was that he lied multiple times to congress while under oath. Lying to congress as you know is a serious felony, especially in Kavanaugh’s case given the fact that (1) he did that as a federal judge who should know better and (2) he lied to congress on multiple occasions.

An excerpt from 12/18/2018 USA Today article

The logical question then becomes if Kavanaugh can be proven to have lied to congress under oath, a felony, can he be indicted? Is it possible to indict a sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice or are they for all intents and purposes, above the law? Is there any case law that precludes such an eventuality? All these are serious questions that one would think the mainstream media would have posed to the myriad TV legal eagle pundits by now. Instead as it has now become customary, it is left to Yours Truly to ask the serious questions the mainstream media won’t ask, for which the public is desperately seeking answers to.

Bottom line with all the attention focused on whether Trump can be indicted, it is about time the mainstream media also started asking the equally important question as to whether a sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice, in this case Kavanaugh, can be indicted.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. 

Dem Senators Heitkamp & Manchin Must Hold The Line On Kavanaugh


Ever since President Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh for the U.S. Supreme Court, the running narrative among mainstream media types has been that Dem Senators Joe Manchin(WV) and Heidi Heitkamp(ND) who are up for reelection this year, have no otherwise but to vote for Kavanaugh because Trump won decisively in both West Virginia and North Dakota in 2016.

Senators Heidi Heitkamp(D-ND) & Joe Manchin(D-WV)

In other words according to the mainstream media talking heads, it would be political suicide if the two Dem Senators from Trump-popular states opposed Kavanaugh’s nomination.

Recent events however suggest that during his confirmation hearings for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Kavanaugh may have lied under oath to Congress–a felony. This is such a serious issue that U.S. Senators need to get to the bottom of before casting their vote for or against Kavanaugh. Senate Republicans are working hard to hide from the public, documents that could prove Kavanaugh lied to Congress. Against this backdrop, Dem Senators Heitkamp and Manchin have a duty not to allow Senate Republicans to ram Kavanaugh through without proper vetting especially as regards to his potential felonious conduct. Simply put, Senators Heitkamp and Manchin must hold the line on Kavanaugh.


There is also such an egregious double standard surrounding what Senate Republicans are trying to do with Kavanaugh compared to what they demanded with Obama’s Supreme Court nominees Sotomayor and Kagan. This tweet by Sen Kamala Harris(D-CA) perfectly illustrates this egregious double standard.


Senators Heitkamp and Manchin should also be sympathetic to pleas by their fellow Senator Patrick Leahy(D-VT) who is desperate to get to the truth about Kavanaugh because it was him that Kavanaugh potentially lied to under oath. Senator Leahy deserves to know the truth about Kavanaugh.


Bottom line if Senators Heitkamp and Manchin vote for Kavanaugh without inquiring as to whether he lied under oath to Congress–a felony–it will be an exercise of extreme cowardice and quite frankly a dereliction of their senatorial duty to properly vet nominees to the highest court in the land. They must hold the line on Kavanaugh.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out