On the third day of the impeachment trial of suspended Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a former deputy attorney general who was fired for insubordination, and who later sued claiming wrongful termination, said he and other former staffers had no evidence to support their claim that Paxton allegedly committed a crime.
Little asked Vassar questions related to an FBI complaint he and others made.
"Did you tell the FBI that Attorney General Paxton had legally disclosed confidential material to someone, yes or no?" Little asked.
"We alleged illegal activity could occur." "But you didn't know that Paxton had disclosed anything to anyone?" Little asked.
Regarding Article 1, Little asked Vassar if he knew anything about the Mitte Foundation and the state statute cited in the article.
Regarding Article 4, which alleges Paxton "Illegally" obtained information from his own office, Little asked: Paxton "Didn't properly access anything in office?" "No, not what I'm aware of," Vassar replied.
Regarding the Article 5 accusation that Paxton hired an attorney to benefit Nate Paul, Little asked if the attorney "Wasn't a prosecuting pro tem, was he?" Vassar replied, "No." Regarding Article 6 allegations related to Paxton firing employees, Little asked, "Don't you think Paxton had a right to be upset with you for reporting him to FBI with no evidence?" "I suppose he's entitled to whatever feelings he may have felt at the time," Vassar said.
In response to allegations that Paxton accepted a bribe to renovate his home in Article 10, Vassar said, "I don't know the elements of bribery. I am not a criminal lawyer." "Do you know who paid for the Paxton kitchen renovations?" Little asked.
No comments:
Post a Comment