Ryan Goodnan, a former Special Counsel at the Department of Defense, dropped a bombshell on CNN’s OutFront show(03/21/23 ), telling host Erin Burnett that contrary to popular belief, New York legal precedent does indeed dictate that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg must bring criminal charges against former President Trump for falsifying of business records.
Goodman said that after analyzing cases going back 15 years related to falsifying of business records, there is already more than enough evidence to indict Trump. Put another way, regular people have been charged based on far less incriminating evidence.
Goodman specifically told host Erin Burnett(3:57): “What we did is we surveyed the last fifteen years of all the District Attorney offices across New York, and saw how many times they brought this particular charge–falsifying business records–and the conclusion is essentially, if the person’s last name was not Trump, he would be charged.”
Goodman then went on to point out specific examples of New Yorkers who have been prosecuted for falsifying business records, with far less evidence than the Manhattan DA’s office is known go have against Trump. The image below lists some of the cases Goodman cited.
Bottom line folks, despite all the lamentations by prominent Republicans, of former President Trump being a “victim” of a “weaponized” justice system, the evidence, as Ryan Goodman correctly illustrates, shows the complete opposite, and that is, any other similarly situated New Yorker would have been indicted already.
The real question is what valid excuse DA Alvin Bragg will offer to the public if his office decides not to indict former President Trump? Yours Truly will go out on a limb and say an indictment(s) from the Manhattan DA’s office is/are coming. Only question left is when it/they will come down.
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
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Marcia Fudge appeared on CNN’s Tonight show (08/22/22) to address recent media reports that show significant appraisal disparities between homes owned by people of color, as opposed to those owned by Whites. Secretary Fudge told CNN host Laura Coates that the appraisal problem, which was initially relegated to homes in redlined districts, is now “systemic, and intentional to some degree.”
The latest example which has stunned many, involves two Black Johns Hopkins University professors, Nathan Connolly and Shani Mott, who live in an affluent Maryland neighborhood. The Black couple’s home was initially appraised at $472,000, but after they “whitewashed” their home and let their White friend pose as the home owner, their house was appraised at a staggering $950,000, almost double the initial value.
Asked for her response to the outrageous Maryland incident, Secretary Fudge said(2:23): “I think professionally and personally, it is an absolute violation of the law. It is a violation of the fair housing law, it is a violation of the lending law, so what HUD is doing, and what we have done already is, we were tasked by the president to look at appraisal bias, because what we know is that it used to be that these things happened only in redlined communities, but now it is pervasive. It is happening everywhere, and we determined that part of the problem was how appraisers are trained, who is in the appraisal industry, and how they are governed, and so what we did in March was to present a report that showed how deeply this whole bias situation is across this country. It is systemic, and it is intentional to some degree…What we’ve already done is have the appraisal sub committee say to every single state in this country, the test that you use is no longer valid because it is a violation of the fair housing law.”
Secretary Fudge clarified her remarks regarding the test saying she was referring to the test to become an appraiser, adding(3:53), “What we have looked at is how data is collected. That’s part of the problem, it’s the data. So they collect data, and the data is not what it should be, they then use the data in a way that it should not be used, and so they come up with these biased appraisals. But as well, when you look at an industry that is more than 95% White, you find that people of color are treated differently because there is an inherent bias with a lot of them, and because they collect the data, the data is not good data.”
Secretary Fudge also made a startling acknowledgement regarding HUD, saying no previous administration has ever attempted to address the home appraisal bias problem, which is now evidently systemic. She said(5:05): “It has not happened before. This is the first of it’s kind report, this is the first if it’s kind subcommittee. It’s called Property Appraisal Valuation Equity. What the president has said is that we have to look at everything through a lens of equity. What we have realized is that people selling homes, just as the persons you were talking about, and even people buying homes, if their appraisal is not correct, what we find, especially as Black people and communities of color and underserved communities, is we lose great wealth just through the appraisal process. If those homes are appraised the way that they should be, then we look at being able to pass down significantly more resources and more wealth to generations that follow. But if we are constantly undervaluing communities of color, either because they are communities of color, or that the person themselves is in a community that they don’t think that we should be in, then we consistently lose wealth in our communities, and that’s why this is so important from an equity situation.”
Secretary Fudge concluded with her personal home appraisal story, telling host Coates that her house , which is in a Black community, is literally two doors away from an all-White community. She has a bigger lot size and house than the one two doors away from her, yet her house is valued at $25,000 less than that house in the White community.
Bottom line folks, the problem of biased home appraisals is a major one, and needs to be confronted head on. As Secretary Fudge correctly pointed out on CNN, “If those homes are appraised the way that they should be, then we look at being able to pass down significantly more resources and more wealth to generations that follow.” This issue is especially important to communities of color.
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
Former President Trump’s Senior Adviser and Son-in-Law Jared Kushner, appeared on Fox News’ Hannity show (08/22/22) to discuss his new book, “Breaking History, A White House Memoir”. The basic premise of Kushner’s book is that his Father-in-Law accomplished quite a lot in four years, and would have done much more, had he not been subjected to “false investigations”.
Kushner specifically told host Hannity (1:50): “You were speaking earlier about all of the different accomplishments he was able to have economically. Those weren’t an accident. It’s been awful to watch the inflation that’s happened, the rising gas prices, but all that happened under the guise of all the investigations and attacks and I write extensively in the book. Every one who has read it says that it’s a very fast-paced read and that’s because I weave together all of the efforts to try to push forward on the different policies, while simultaneously dealing with all these false investigations that we had to fend off because even though they were based on crazy accusations from the beginning, whether it was the Russia hoax, or trying to get Trump, or impeach him for trying to investigate corruption in Ukraine, they were serious accusations and we had to take it.”
Kushner also said his book lays out how former President Trump negotiated a deal between Russia and Saudi Arabia in order to save our oil and gas industry. He appeared to blame the current problem we have with high gas prices, on the fact that President Biden doesn’t get along with world leaders like his Father-in-Law did.
He specifically told host Hannity(2:47): “President Trump got along with people in the world. He got along with Vladimir Putin, he got along with President Xi. That didn’t mean he didn’t have tough discussions with them, but I really go through the way that he dealt with them, which is how he kept the world peaceful. All the critics who were lying about the Trump administration for four years, they were saying that if Trump was elected, he would lead to world war three, but we had six peace deals during Trump’s time, and the world was a very very safe place. We go through all that extensively in the book.”
Kushner also talked about his efforts to broker a peace deal in the Middle East. He said(4:10): “One of the efforts that I worked on, that I detail in the book, was the efforts in the Middle East to try to bring peace between Israel and the Arab countries, and that’s something that the conventional thinking was that it would never happen, but President Trump was an outsider. He brought a businessman’s approach to Washington. Businessmen are results-driven, unlike politicians who generally want to just process…I write about how an outsider without a lot of political experience, and a team, came in and were able to achieve results that the political career people were not able to achieve, and so the book really goes through that in detail.”
The interview then came to the million dollar question which every viewer had probably tuned in for, and that is, whether former President Trump would run again in 2024. I got the sense from Hannity’s questioning, that he was almost dissuading Trump from running again because of the toll his presidency has had on his family, but I’ll let you be the judge on that.
Hannity(4:54): “When you factor in all that your family went through, we’re talking about Don Jr, and Eric, and Lara, and Ivanka…when you factor all of that in, do you want him to? Would you want to go through that again?”
Kushner responded in relevant part(5:31): “I think that the way we all viewed it, is that the cost of service, and of the attacks, was very small relative to the impact that President Trump and his administration were able to make for so many people and their families…”
I think it’s safe to say that any reasonable person presented with Kushner’s “small cost” response to Hannity’s question, would conclude that he believes former President Trump will indeed run again in 2024.
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
Rep Veronica Escobar(D-TX) appeared on MSNBC Reports w/Andrea Mitchell (07/18/22) to discuss the recently released report by the Texas Senate on the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Rep Escobar made a very important point on the show, telling host Andrea Mitchell that the deadly “wild west” environment created by Texas elected officials, beginning with Governor Greg Abbott, is partly to blame for the horrific shooting in Uvalde.
This point is largely missed by the mainstream media when reporting about the mass shooting in Uvalde, but it cannot be restated enough.
Rep Escobar(video at 1:00):“I think the report is important, but I also think we need to zoom out a little bit because the leadership void goes far beyond law enforcement. And what the report did not touch on[are]2 things, (1) the Governor, who is the highest ranking elected official, the chief elected official of the state and (2) the state legislature that makes open carry the law of the land in Texas so that anyone can get access to a gun without any training and really a loosening of gun laws that was historic. It is so important that these reports and that this analysis look at what happened on the ground that day, but we also have to look at the context in Texas, the environment that has been created by Republicans, who want to create a wild west sort of environment in a state, that has led us to be…one of the most deadliest states for mass shootings.”
Rep Escobar went on to specifically address Gov Abbott’s failures:“He’s been pretty silent. He’s very eager to point the finger at others, really on any situation including Uvalde and he, as the highest-ranking elected official in the state of Texas, I have yet to hear the Governor accept any responsibility, or bring forward any ideas for meaningful change. He is literally someone who has only used his position to make Texas less safe for its citizens and uses our resources for political stunts.”
She went on to add that the political stunt Gov Abbott is pulling at the southern border aka “Operation Lone Star” has siphoned much needed funds away from mental health services and public schools, both of which are still poorly funded in Texas compared to other states.
Bottom line folks, Texas is, and has been a solid red state for quite some time now. It is important however for people who don’t live in the Lone Star state, or keep up with its politics, to know that none of Governor Abbott’s Republican predecessors created the deadly gun violence environment in the state like Gov Abbott and his allies have. Rep Escobar is absolutely spot on, that any meaningful discussion of gun violence in the Lone Star state has to take into account the “wild west” environment created by Gov Abbott and his Texas Republican allies.
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
An interesting segment on Fox News’ The Story w/Martha MacCallum(06/24/22) delved into the feud brewing between Senator Susan Collins(R-Maine) and conservative Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch over the decision by the high court to overturn Roe v Wade, a 1973 precedent that legalized abortion in the United States. According to Fox News Congressional Correspondent Aishah Hasni, Senator Collins is not just upset because she was misled during the Senate confirmation hearings on questions about respecting precedents, but also because this bombshell decision comes at a time of great division in the country, and she fears the decision will only widen the divisions.
Senator Collins issued a statement saying:“This ill-considered action will further divide the country at a moment when, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to show more consistency and restraint. Throwing out a precedent overnight that the country has relied upon for half a century is not conservative. It is a sudden and radical jolt to the country that will lead to chaos, anger, and a further loss of confidence in our government.”
Senators Collins and Lisa Murkowski(R-Alaska) have apparently introduced a bill which aims to codify Roe v Wade, so we’ll see how far that goes.
Bottom line folks, Republicans routinely dismiss criticisms of the out-of-touch Roberts Supreme Court as simply “rantings of the radical left.” it will be interesting to see how they deal with the very sharp criticisms leveled at the high court by moderate Republican Susan Collins, and especially, her written assertion–not AOC’s or The Squad’s–that what the court engaged in re Roe v wade was “not conservative” but rather, “a sudden and radical jolt to the country that will lead to chaos, anger, and a further loss of confidence in our government”, which essentially translates to an extremist court.
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
In a fiery speech delivered minutes after the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision knocking down her state’s concealed gun law, New York Governor kathy Hochul slammed the decision, calling the high court, “a politicized Supreme Court.”
Governor Hochul specifically said:“We are not powerless in this situation. We are not going to cede our rights that easily, despite the best efforts of the politicized Supreme Court of the United States of America…Apparently, the Supreme Court has now decided, with this far-reaching decision, that the two step standard that had been in place since Heller vs McDonald, where they analyze the 2nd amendment where it combines history…but also means and scrutiny–does the means of the restriction justify the infringement, and most people would say, yes we have a right to protect people from gun violence…They[Supreme Court]have now said, that the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. That’s it. No longer can we strike the balance.”
Gov Hochul then read directly from the text of the Supreme Court decision:“Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this nation’s historical tradition, may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the 2nd amendment’s unqualified command”, to which she responded, “Shocking, absolutely shocking, that they have taken away our right to have reasonable restrictions. We can have restrictions on speech, you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater, but somehow there is no restrictions allowed on the 2nd amendment? This is New York, we don’t back down, we fight back…I’m sorry this dark day has come. We are supposed to go back to what was in place since 1788 when the constitution of the United States of America was ratified. And I would like to point out to Supreme Court Justices that the only weapons at that time were muskets. I’m prepared to go back to muskets. I don’t think they envisioned the high-capacity assault weapon magazines intended for battlefields, as being covered. I guess we’re just going to have to disagree.”
Governor Hochul has since convened an extraordinary session of the New York legislature to address issues raised by this Supreme Court decision–leadership matters, folks!!
NEWS: I am convening an extraordinary session of the legislature on Thursday, June 30 to take action in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on concealed carry.
— Governor Kathy Hochul (@GovKathyHochul) June 24, 2022
Bottom line folks, given the recent horrific mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, it’s not hard to understand Governor Hochul’s frustration with this Supreme Court decision, which reasonable people will agree, curtails efforts by states to institute common sense gun control measures.
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
Former President Donald Trump called into Fox News’ Sean Hannity show(04/13/22) where he among other things, lamented the weaponization of law enforcement for political purposes. Trump joked that in the last five years, he has gone through “more investigations than Al Capone, Jesse James and Billy the kid put together.” Yours Truly found this quite interesting because even though weaponization of the criminal justice system for political purposes is a legitimate topic of concern, Trump’s DOJ was brazenly political, especially under Attorney General William Barr. As a matter of fact, Trump admitted to host Sean Hannity that he was frustrated with AG Barr’s refusal to prosecute President Biden’s son Hunter, during the 2020 campaign season.
Trump specifically told Hannity(video at 32:00 onwards): “I’ve gone through in five years, more investigations than Al Capone, Jesse James and Billy the kid put together…They’ve weaponized law enforcement essentially, they’ve weaponized the AGs in the states..and district attorneys…I mean, it’s such a horrible thing that they are doing, and I just don’t think the people of the country are going to take it. but I just, based on past, I think probably nothing will happen[to Hunter Biden]. Look, we also had a chance, but Bill Barr, the Attorney General, didn’t want to be impeached, they[Democrats] were vicious with him…How do you not get impeached? You just sit back and relax and wait out for your term to end, and that’s what he did, and it was a sad thing and a sad day for this country, then he writes his crummy book, which was so false…He was so afraid of being impeached, that he refused to do his job.”
There’s no other way to interpret Trump’s remarks on Hannity other than, he was infuriated by his own AG Bill Barr, for not prosecuting Hunter Biden during the runup to the 2020 presidential elections, a move that Trump knew would give him political advantage over his opponent Joe Biden. This, needless to say, would have been the quintessential weaponization of the criminal justice system. Put another way, Trump is not concerned about the legitimate problem surrounding the weaponization of the criminal justice system, he is just mad that his own AG refused to go along with it when it came to Hunter Biden.
Bottom line folks, as we have seen with many other issues involving former President Trump, projection is always a major theme. As Trump is now complaining about weaponization of the criminal justice system, it must not be left unsaid that his own DOJ was notorious for that. Trump’s remarks also raise serious questions about the Hunter Biden criminal investigation. If Bill Barr was against the investigation while he was AG, why is he now saying on cable TV that Hunter should be investigated?
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
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
The bombshell seditious conspiracy indictment of 11 members of the militia group OathKeepers following their involvement in the January 6th insurrection, is raising serious questions as to how far up the law enforcement, military, and intelligence food chain, the conspiracy went. Specifically, given the level of tactical military sophistication they displayed on January 6th, there are valid questions as to whether Trump-allied senior members of U.S. law enforcement, military, and intelligence apparatus, gave material support, or even worse, are still members of this dangerous militia group that attempted to violently overthrow the government. A segment on CNN’s Outfront with Erin Burnett(01/13/22) delved into this very topic.
The full Outfront segment is available here, but the relevant clip is below.
Host Erin Burnett said in relevant part: “Prior planning, coordination, sedition, weapons. The 11 people charged today, were[in a]conspiracy, and they are not small fish, like many of the more than 700 people already charged, some of who may have been wrapped up in the moment. Not the case with these individuals. This group had a level of combat training, they were prepared to use force, they had a stash of weapons that they brought for that specific intent, and the question tonight is…now you’ve got a conspiracy, you’ve got planning, you’ve got it all laid out. How much higher does that go?”
Any reasonable person presented with the OathKeepers indictment would reasonably conclude, as host Erin Burnett did, that given the sophistication of their January 6th operation, people higher up in the law enforcement, military, intelligence and even political food chain, were providing material support to the OathKeepers. Providing material support to this dangerous militia group would also necessarily imply that they are members of the group–a scary thought indeed.
CNN’s Sara Sidner followed up with an in depth look at OathKeepers leader Stewart Rhodes in an appearance on New Day (01/14/22), where she dropped a bombshell that further bolsters the troubling prospect that the OathKeepers may have enjoyed material support from insiders within our law enforcement, military and intelligence ranks.
Sara Sidner said: “One of the things the OathKeepers do, is they try and recruit either current or former military, current or former members of law enforcement, current or former people who have been part of the intelligence apparatus in the United States, whether it be the FBI , CIA, anybody that they can get and bring into the organization, and when you think about that, it means that they have tactical training to do something like this[January 6th], and to plan something like this.”
This raises serious questions including but not limited to, what kind of arms and illegally acquired intelligence the OathKeepers currently have, whether in light of this indictment, it’s still okay to have active members of our law enforcement, military, and intelligence apparatus being active members of this violent militia group, etc.
Bottom line folks, Erin Burnett’s question as to how high up this conspiracy goes, is a very serious one, that needs to be seriously addressed by Congress, especially the January 6th Committee, and the mainstream media. For the record, this question has been raised before by concerned members of the public, including Yours Truly, but always treated as one requiring a voluntary answer from our law enforcement, military and intelligence brass. Given the seriousness of this OathKeepers indictment, this question should no longer be one that requires a voluntary answer. The mainstream media and Congress, preferably the January 6th Committee, must demand an answer from leaders in our law enforcement, military and intelligence agencies, as to how much the OathKeepers have infiltrated their ranks. This is a serious national security problem, and it should be treated as such. A major part of the January 6th Committee’s mission is to prevent another January 6th-type insurrection. Reasonable people will agree that rooting out extremism within our law enforcement, military, and intelligence ranks will go a long way in fulfilling that mission.
Specific emphasis should be placed on Trumper states like Texas, which has a heavy OathKeepers presence, and was involved all the way to the top(AG Paxton and other political leaders) in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. What other nefarious activities are the OathKeepers enlisted for in such states? Did the Texas political establishment provide material support to the OathKeepers, for their January 6th operation?
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
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
