Why 'RINOs' are at the center of Ken Paxton's impeachment trial in a GOP-led Texas Senate

In the impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, both sides signaled from Tuesday's outset that they must play to two separate but entwined sets of jurors.

That's why Rusty Hardin, the famed trial lawyer from Houston hired by the team of impeachment managers from the Texas House to help present the case against the three-term Republican, put an almost incongruous question to his first witness:"Are you a RINO?" Hardin asked Jeff Mateer, who until resigning in October 2020 was Paxton's top aide, and a political appointee whose social conservative credentials were every bit as unassailable as Paxton's own before being lured from private practice to join the state's top lawyer.

Mateer seemed almost amused by the question suggesting he was a "Republican In Name Only," noting that he had been chosen to be a federal judge by then-President Donald Trump. The nomination was later withdrawn because, in part, Mateer had been deemed too conservative, even for some Republicans, after making remarks comparing same-sex marriage to polygamy and bestiality.

But the question was meant to blunt the assertions by Paxton's legal team and many of his grassroots supporters that the impeachment managers from the Republican-led Texas House were actually Democratic tools or part of the increasingly narrow slice of the GOP electorate that considers itself moderate.

More: 'Creep of corruption': Ken Paxton pleads not guilty as Senate impeachment trial gets underway

Paxton's top lawyer, Tony Buzbee of Houston, used his opening statement on the floor of the Texas Senate where the senators themselves are acting jurors to direct his arguments to the couple of hundred Paxton supporters in the gallery and to the countless Republican base voters watching the trial unfold on a livestream feed.

Buzbee railed against what he called a "frenzy press" and "media members with agendas" for driving the narrative laid out in the 16 allegations against Patrick for misusing his office to help a friend and campaign donor in legal trouble. And that friend, according to the House's articles of impeachment, found a job in his company for a woman said to be having an affair with Paxton.

All those charges will be shot down as unfounded or maliciously spread lies, Buzbee said. And he went on to question whether the 31-member Senate, although tasked under the Texas Constitution with carrying out impeachment trial, should be taking up the matter at all.

"Because of what this House has done, only 30 people out of almost 30 million will decide whether Ken Paxton is allowed to serve in the office he was voted into," Buzbee said, but not explicitly adding that Sen. Angela Paxton, the attorney general's wife, is not allowed to vote. "That's not how it's supposed to work. That's not democratic."

More: Here's why AG Ken Paxton's impeachment trial will gain attention well beyond Texas

The words in Buzbee's opening remarks dovetailed with those offered by audience members, both in media interview and emblazoned on some of the red t-shirts that Paxton supporters wore to the Capitol.

"RINO Hunting Permit," read one of the messages that included an image of bull rider atop a bucking rhinoceros against the backdrop of the Texas flag.

Brandon Rottinghaus, an author and political science professor at the University of Houston, said both camps in the impeachment battle have little choice but to pay attention to the political implications associated with what is supposed to be a remedy for removing an elected official charged with serious wrongdoing in office.

"The swirl of politics and legal questions are inevitably tied together in an impeachment trial like this," Rottinghaus said.  "They are unavoidably intertwined.

"The House managers and attorneys want to address the elephant in the room at the start of the trial," he added. "By talking about the politics of this early, they remove the possible sting of it later.

"The defense wants to inject some reasonable doubt by claiming politics drove the impeachment. When Hardin and company bring up the politics, they can shape the discussion and create their own frame of how politics did or did not affect the process."

In votes on a series of pretrial motions Tuesday that could have derailed the impeachment process before it started, all 12 Senate Democrats voted each time to advance the charges against Paxton. Only six of the 18 voting Republicans consistently voted in the attorney general's favor, suggesting that more than two-thirds of the GOP members are not falling lockstep in line with the anti-RINO messaging.

Luke Macias, a Republican activist and podcaster who uses his social media platforms to chastise Republican political figures who cozy up to moderates and progressives, acknowledged that the votes on the motions could prove problematic for Paxton's efforts to stave off conviction and removal from office.

But the hill is not insurmountable, Macias said in video message.

"Some of them are against impeachment but they just don't find it becoming for the Senate to dismiss these charges," he said. "They would have a hard time saying there should be no trial."

Rottinghaus said the Republican senators, regardless of whether they stick with Paxton or are convinced he must be removed, could find themselves in a tough spot by the time the trial ends.

"Confronting the politics of this won’t absolve the votes of Republicans senators who vote to convict in the minds of the Republican electorate," he said. "But it will lessen the surprise factor and give these juror-senators some political cover."

This article originally appeared on Corpus Christi Caller Times: Why 'RINOs' are at the center of AG Ken Paxton's impeachment trial