Ditto on CD Bush’s comment. i had to miss the opening statements but may listen later tonight. As for the pressure tactics from the boys out west, I think Molly Ivins and Billy Lee Brammer have some colorful advice about political survival.
As I expected, a dog and pony show. As to rulings on evidence, compliance with the impeachment rules, or any other procedural rules the chair’s rulings are legally irrelevant. There is no appeal . And of course, Paxton’ s lawyers harp on burden of proof. There is no binding burden of proof in a political proceeding like there is in a judicial case. The Senate rules cover the hearing with a veneer of due process and fair play. The decision to convict or not will not be based solely on facts and fair play. Political motivations have and will continue to be the determining factor.
Paxton's team will insist on meeting the burden of proof. The House managers will insist they're rescuing Texas from a corrupt rogue. After 2-3 weeks of testimony, what will the people think?
He got Mateer back on his heels early on, but now he seems to be throwing stuff out to see what sticks.
Also, Buzbee (and Cogdell) are hot, hard and aggressive — not a good fit with the Senate's more laid-back (some — including me — would say "torpid") temperament.
Well done, in depth nuanced coverage so far. What bothers me most are the blatant threats from donor’s and others, against the Senator’s.
Then I remind myself this is Texas.
Nice work, Deece. Thanks, and keep it coming.
Ditto on CD Bush’s comment. i had to miss the opening statements but may listen later tonight. As for the pressure tactics from the boys out west, I think Molly Ivins and Billy Lee Brammer have some colorful advice about political survival.
As I expected, a dog and pony show. As to rulings on evidence, compliance with the impeachment rules, or any other procedural rules the chair’s rulings are legally irrelevant. There is no appeal . And of course, Paxton’ s lawyers harp on burden of proof. There is no binding burden of proof in a political proceeding like there is in a judicial case. The Senate rules cover the hearing with a veneer of due process and fair play. The decision to convict or not will not be based solely on facts and fair play. Political motivations have and will continue to be the determining factor.
Paxton's team will insist on meeting the burden of proof. The House managers will insist they're rescuing Texas from a corrupt rogue. After 2-3 weeks of testimony, what will the people think?
This Buzbee dude...not a fan. Mateer is holding his own today.
He got Mateer back on his heels early on, but now he seems to be throwing stuff out to see what sticks.
Also, Buzbee (and Cogdell) are hot, hard and aggressive — not a good fit with the Senate's more laid-back (some — including me — would say "torpid") temperament.
Agree that Buzbee is aggressive and maybe a bit bullying but then again I’m not in the law world either. His behavior could be normal for him.