The good news: we’re halfway done, according to the time schedule. The bad news: I still can’t tell what the Senate will do. Plus: finally, Central Casting sends us an interesting witness!
The even better news, I'd say, is that there is enough evidence in Maxwell's testimony to convict Paxton, and your timeline makes it look possible by the end of this coming week. Yee haw.
I think Maxwell was the most impressive witness yet, for his reputation, his demeanor and his unshakeable conviction Paul would get Paxton in trouble. His presence kept the senators mesmerized, a tough assignment on a Friday afternoon.
I loved the thinly-veiled contempt with which Maxwell described his pre-termination meeting with Brent Webster: "He interviewed me in a vague and inept way."
Agree completely. There is nothing worse than a long-tenured and highly-respected lawman testifying that he considered your behavior illegal and he was acting against his own will when obeying the orders of a superior.
I've listened to some of the trial, probably 25% or so. I don't think I've ever had anything good to say about Lt. Gov Patrick and I still have nothing good to say, but my left-handed compliment to Patrick is that he is giving the appearance of being much more neutral and even-handed than I ever expected in this trial. My observation is that he is so taken up by the trappings of the trial and his role as judge that he sees himself at the center of a courtroom drama and he relishes his role as judge. He is so caught up with trying to play his role as judge that he seems to have forgotten (momentarily) that he is an ultra-partisan hack. Although he frequently confers with advisors, sometimes he looks like a kid who just had the training wheels taken off his bicycle when he rules on an objection without having to ask advice. We can only hope that his momentary lapses into the world of the reasonable will allow enough testimony to get into the record.
Patrick has certainly been enthusiastic, if not always consistent in his procedural rulings. I also agree that he appears to be trying to keep the ball in the middle of the fairway on his overall conduct of the trial. This may be good for the prosecution: he's one of the few Texas officials who has enough credibility with the MAGA base to defy them in his conduct of the trial.
The even better news, I'd say, is that there is enough evidence in Maxwell's testimony to convict Paxton, and your timeline makes it look possible by the end of this coming week. Yee haw.
I think Maxwell was the most impressive witness yet, for his reputation, his demeanor and his unshakeable conviction Paul would get Paxton in trouble. His presence kept the senators mesmerized, a tough assignment on a Friday afternoon.
I loved the thinly-veiled contempt with which Maxwell described his pre-termination meeting with Brent Webster: "He interviewed me in a vague and inept way."
Agree completely. There is nothing worse than a long-tenured and highly-respected lawman testifying that he considered your behavior illegal and he was acting against his own will when obeying the orders of a superior.
I've listened to some of the trial, probably 25% or so. I don't think I've ever had anything good to say about Lt. Gov Patrick and I still have nothing good to say, but my left-handed compliment to Patrick is that he is giving the appearance of being much more neutral and even-handed than I ever expected in this trial. My observation is that he is so taken up by the trappings of the trial and his role as judge that he sees himself at the center of a courtroom drama and he relishes his role as judge. He is so caught up with trying to play his role as judge that he seems to have forgotten (momentarily) that he is an ultra-partisan hack. Although he frequently confers with advisors, sometimes he looks like a kid who just had the training wheels taken off his bicycle when he rules on an objection without having to ask advice. We can only hope that his momentary lapses into the world of the reasonable will allow enough testimony to get into the record.
Patrick has certainly been enthusiastic, if not always consistent in his procedural rulings. I also agree that he appears to be trying to keep the ball in the middle of the fairway on his overall conduct of the trial. This may be good for the prosecution: he's one of the few Texas officials who has enough credibility with the MAGA base to defy them in his conduct of the trial.