Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton acquitted on all impeachment charges by Senate

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been acquitted on 16 articles of impeachment related to allegations of corruption and abuse of office. The historic vote Saturday in the Senate came after a two-week trial that brought into focus sharp divides within the state’s Republican Party.

Paxton was only the third state official to be impeached in Texas history, and the first to survive to remain in office. He has denied the allegations that included providing legal favors to a political donor and retaliating against whistleblowers in his own office. Suspended since his impeachment by the House in May, Paxton has now been reinstated.

But his legal troubles extend beyond Saturday’s impeachment vote; he has been under felony indictment for securities fraud since 2015, the year he took office, and federal prosecutors have reportedly taken grand jury testimony a former Paxton aide who testified during the impeachment trial.

A serious tone hung over the chamber as senators each took turns casting their ballots, one-by-one, article-by-article. Reporters and members of the public looked on from the gallery. Among them were some of the former employees who reported Paxton to law enforcement.

In remarks to the Senate after the vote, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick criticized his lawmaker colleagues in the state House for what he characterized as a rush to impeach Paxton. He urged the Legislature in its next session to amend the state constitution to change the impeachment process, including requiring the House to give members more time to weigh serious allegations.

“Millions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted on this impeachment,” Patrick said, adding that he intends to call for an audit of public money spent by the House.

This is a developing story.

Here are the results of the votes to sustain each article. To convict, 21 yes votes were needed. (Here are details on each article).

Article 1: Disregard of official duty: Protection of Charitable Organization

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 2: Disregard of Official Duty, Abuse of the Opinion Process

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 3: Disregard of Official Duty, Abuse of the Open Records Process

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 4: Disregard of Official Duty, Misuse of Official Information

• ACQUITTED (2 yes, 28 no)

Article 5: Disregard of Official Duty, Engagement of Brandon Cammack

• ACQUITTED (13 yes, 17 no)

Article 6: Disregard of Official Duty, Termination of Whistleblowers

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 7: Misapplication of Public Resources, Whistleblower Investigation and Report

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 8: Disregard of Official Duty, Settlement Agreement

• ACQUITTED (8 yes, 22 no)

Article 9: Constitutional Bribery, Nate Paul’s Employment of Mistress

• ACQUITTED (12 yes, 18 no)

Article 10: Constitutional Bribery, Nate Paul’s Providing Renovations to Paxton Home

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 15: False Statements in Official Records, Whistleblower Response Report

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 16: Conspiracy and Attempted Conspiracy

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 17: Misappropriation of Public Resources

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 18: Dereliction of Duty

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 19: Unfitness for Office

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Article 20: Abuse of Public trust

• ACQUITTED (14 yes, 16 no)

Articles 11-14:

• The Senate is voting on a defense motion to dismiss.

Members of the Senate deliberated in private for about eight hours starting Friday and reconvened Saturday morning for the vote.

The senators voted on each of the articles of impeachment. It would have taken only one article to be sustained to remove Paxton, who was most recently elected to his four-year term in 2022.

[MORE: What is Ken Paxton accused of doing?]

The House impeachment in May and subsequent Senate trial have been fraught with consequences for the Texas Republican Party, which controls the Legislature. Paxton is only the third state official to be impeached in Texas history, and the proceedings have further exposed fractures within the GOP. Donald Trump weighed in this week with support for Paxton, who has been a staunch ally of the former president.

Paxton previously served a decade in the state House and two years in the Senate before his term as attorney general began in 2015.

As attorney general, he leads an office with more than 4,000 employees, including nearly 750 attorneys who handle more than 30,000 cases each year.

[MORE: Who would pick Ken Paxton’s successor if he’s removed?]

What was Paxton accused of?

The articles before senators included charges of disregard of official duty, constitutional bribery, conspiracy and attempted conspiracy, misapplication of public resources, misappropriation of public resources, dereliction of duty, unfitness for office and abuse of public trust.

Paxton did not take the stand and wasn’t present for most of the Senate trial. He was back in the Texas Senate chamber Friday for closing arguments. His wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, has been present, but she could not vote on her husband’s fate.

Paxton has been suspended from the Attorney General’s Office since the House impeachment in May.

[OPINION: Defenders of Paxton & Biden sound a lot alike: Ridiculous]

House managers’ closing arguments Friday

Senators on Friday heard closing arguments from both sides on what was the ninth day of the trial. Paxton’s lawyer stressed that the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Rep. Andrew Murr, a Republican from Junction and chair of the House impeachment managers, argued why the state’s top law enforcement officer deserves to lose his job.

He said Austin real estate developer Nate Paul, who donated $25,000 to Paxton in 2018, had the “keys” to the Attorney General’s Office. Paxton’s desire to aid Paul, who was facing legal troubles, tore the office apart, Murr said.

Paxton betrayed the trust of knowledgeable staff and his conservative values, Murr added, noting that Paxton’s top advisors were “unabashedly conservative.”

“Mr. Paxton’s attorneys like to remind everyone that he was elected by 4.2 million voters, but they have blindly ignored the fact that he ultimately ended up serving one person: himself,” Murr said.

Murr’s closing presentation, far more restrained compared to Paxton’s defense team, included playing snippets of testimony to argue that evidence warrants the substantiation of the articles of impeachment.

He described how Paxton’s second in command had served subpoenas for an investigation related to Paul’s claims that he was being targeted by law enforcement.

It was a “critical” moment that preceding a meeting of senior staff where they realized the extent of Paxton’s involvement with Paul.

“The puzzle pieces came together that day, and they realized they had a massive problem,” Murr said.

With of videos of testimony, Murr argued the whistleblowers warned Paxton of their concerns.

Paxton’s response was “swift” and “vicious,” Murr said.

The House began investigating Paxton after a proposed $3.3 million settlement was reached with whistleblowers who sued his office for retaliation.

Murr cast the settlement as “hush money” and argued that Paul was paying for Paxton’s home renovations until caught. He questioned whether it was a coincidence Paul gave a job to a woman with whom he was having an affair.

Paxton was using an “inordinate” amount of state resources on Paul, Murr said. He noted an attorney general opinion related to foreclosures during COVID-19 that impeachment managers say was meant to help Paul, and allegations that Paxton gave Paul access to information that wasn’t publicly releasable.

Paxton directs the office to serve himself, not the people of Texas, he said.

He told senators they were about to make the most important choice of their career — a decision that will determine “what Texas politics look like — not just the way cynical people outside this building think, but this is about what does public service mean.”

“We must have a shared standard of integrity, of honesty, of service,” Murr said.

He urged the lawmakers to “do right.”

Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican, then took his turn arguing to his fellow lawmakers.

No one wanted to be here today, but they are faced with a heavy and historic moment, said Leach, one of the House impeachment managers.

Leach pushed back on the idea that the impeachment managers are here because they dislike Paxton. He called Paxton a dear friend, political mentor, brother in Christ, and a once trusted advisor.

It’s a difficult situation for him and the senators, he acknowledged.

But it’s right as “painful as it might be” to sustain the articles, Leach said.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who is overseeing the proceedings, reminded senators that they can base their decisions on whether to sustain the 16 articles before them only on the evidence presented during the trial.

“You have serious work to do,” Patrick said, dismissing the lawmakers to deliberate.

Paxton’s attorneys make closing arguments

Paxton’s lawyer gave a fiery dispute of various allegations as he summarized the defense’s case that impeachment articles should not be sustained.

“I know in the fiber of my being that all this foolishness that they accuse this man of is false,” lawyer Tony Buzbee said.

Buzbee stressed that the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“That is an incredibly high burden,” Buzbee said.

He asked senators to put Paxton back to work as attorney general, saying the entire case against him is based on assumptions and jumping to conclusions.

“You know what my dad used to tell me, assumptions make an ass out of you and me, and that’s been this entire case,” Buzbee said.

Buzbee described the whistleblowers who reported Paxton to federal law enforcement as “disgruntled” and “insubordinate” employees who went to the FBI without evidence.

He reiterated his argument that political donor Nate Paul did not have unfettered access to the Attorney General’s Office. Paul was unhappy with the office’s work on his case and even threatened to sue, Buzbee said.

Buzbee pushed back that Paxton accepted a bribe. The woman Paxton was allegedly having an affair with got the job on merit, a campaign donation is not a bribe and Paxton paid for his home renovations, Buzbee said.

Paxton signed a contract hiring an outside attorney to investigate Paul’s claims, he said. The lawyer’s authority to act on behalf of the office when he served subpoenas is central to one of the articles.

“You should be ashamed of what you’ve done here,” he said.

Buzbee questioned why former staff in the office didn’t do more to investigate Paul’s claims that he was being targeted by law enforcement, particularly through the alteration of a search warrant on his home and businesses.

All Paxton did was try to find out the truth, he said.

“This guy thought he was being targeted by the FBI,” Buzbee said. “He can identify with that. Heck, we see it here.”

Buzbee argued that it’s been three years since the whistleblowers went to the FBI, and that nothing has been heard — “crickets,” he said. (Hours after closing arguments, the Associated Press reported that federal prosecutors took grand jury testimony from Paxton’s former personal aide, Drew Wicker, in August. Wicker was among those who testified in the impeachment trial.)

“If you don’t think that the Biden administration and its FBI and Department of Justice would not love ... to indict Ken Paxton, then you’re not paying attention,” Buzbee said.

The Houston attorney cast the trial as political and said the proceedings were happening because House Speaker Dade Phelan “got his feelings hurt” when a video was shared that some claim show the speaker presiding over the house while intoxicated. Paxton called for Phelan to resign.

“I would suggest to you this is a political witch hunt,” Buzbee said. “I would suggest to you that this trial has displayed for the country to see, a partisan fight within the Republican Party.”

Voters elected Paxton in a “resounding victory” knowing about the allegations against Paxton, Buzbee told senators.

Dan Cogdell closed out the arguments for Paxton’s teams.

The proof isn’t there beyond a reasonable doubt, he said.

“Two words: Not guilty,” he said.

[OPINION: You want smoking gun? Hush money receipt? This is as close as it gets in Paxton trial]

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.