• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat [W:613/629]

Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

voyager1 said:
You just explained why the governor is being indicted on this. He doesn't have the authority to force her to resign.
Click to expand...

She wasn't forced to resign, what part of that don't you understand?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
That is a lie, 13% of minimum wage workers don't live in TX, your state has 1.6 million of them

I understand your love for your state but it isn't called the "Land of Fruits and Nuts" by accident. It is an economic disaster which doesn't seem to bother you
Kind of goes with the cost of living in TX which is quite a bit lower than California so now are you changing your tune? Corporate welfare isn't a gift, it is an investment that allows businesses to keep more of what they earn which normally they grow their employment with. Still waiting for you to explain why so many are moving to TX, businesses and employees?
Click to expand...

Texas had the most minimum-wage workers last year, accounting for nearly 13 percent of all such workers across the country, according to data released Tuesday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.


Doh! Darn those pesky facts. The funny thing is that facts stare you right in the face and you still shuffle and dance around and pretend that they aren't there. Sorry Con....but facts is facts.....
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

disneydude said:
Texas had the most minimum-wage workers last year, accounting for nearly 13 percent of all such workers across the country, according to data released Tuesday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.


Doh! Darn those pesky facts. The funny thing is that facts stare you right in the face and you still shuffle and dance around and pretend that they aren't there. Sorry Con....but facts is facts.....
Click to expand...

This is frustrating, that article relates to Federal Minimum wage whereas over 20 plus states have their own, California is one of them. You cannot seem to grasp the concept that 1.6 million Californians made minimum wage and 500,000 Texans.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

eohrnberger said:
All that is just claims by the DA filed for the court proceedings, all of which have yet to stand up in court and be proven.
Asserting that the side you favor's claims are facts now? How is that any different than 'don't believe your lying eyes, believe what I tell you'?
Click to expand...
I merely posted the indictment, as a matter of fact (that it exists, and that it alleges certain things) in response to your post indicating that you had apparently not read it or thought it did not exist or had not been published.

eohrnberger said:
Yes, I looked. The stories are all about the present, partially or even largely unknown facts of the indictment. [...]
Click to expand...

Any assertions or comparisons beyond that are yours, and I would say not a matter of fact (and certainly not representative of my post). Again, I am here to discuss facts, not imagination or strawmen.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
I merely posted the indictment, as a matter of fact (that it exists, and that it alleges certain things) in response to someone who apparently had not read it or thought it did not exist or had not been published.

Any assertions or comparisons beyond that are yours, and I would say not a matter of fact (and certainly not representative of my post). Again, I am here to discuss facts, not imagination or strawmen.
Click to expand...

How about this fact, the DA still has her job
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

CanadaJohn said:
Sorry - look at the indictment presented above. It says that Perry acted illegally by coercing the DA in the performance of her duties - that's the charge. How is it any different when a President tells Congress that he will veto a bill if they include some language or don't include some language? Isn't the President coercing an outcome by using the power of his office?
Click to expand...
He is not coercing a person to quit their job. Surely everyone realizes the difference, which makes your argument desperate in the extreme. As I said in another thread, defending the indefensible is a losing proposition from the outset.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

CanadaJohn said:
Sorry - look at the indictment presented above. It says that Perry acted illegally by coercing the DA in the performance of her duties - that's the charge. How is it any different when a President tells Congress that he will veto a bill if they include some language or don't include some language? Isn't the President coercing an outcome by using the power of his office?
Click to expand...

The difference is very obvious: NO MEMBER OF CONGRESS IS THREATENED OF LOSING THEIR JOB BY THE PRESSIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IF HE ACTS ON HIS VETO THREAT!

Moreover, no President that I'm aware of has ever vetoed a bill simply because it didn't contain the funding level he desired, i.e., the Transportation bill, Farm bill or the recent $3T Border that's been dwindled down by both chambers of Congress to around $650B. Heck, President GW Bush didn't veto TARP because it didn't contain the higher funding level he wanted. He took what Congress ultimately gave him.

My point here is President's typically don't veto bills due to lower than expected funding nor do they do so because they want someone out of a specific government position. They do so because the bill laying before them contains provisions (or the lack thereof) they don't like.

Now, you can argue that's exactly what Gov. Perry did - veto a bill because it contained a spending measure he didn't like - but given the fact that he'd used the funding of the PUI as the basis of his veto threat to pressure DA Lehmberg to resign - his rational for using his veto power goes contrary to common reasoning behind budget reduction measures to justifies him exercising said veto for budget purposes.

In other words, if Gov. Perry had said, "Texas is running a budget deficit and we need to make some significant across the board budget cuts. This bill doesn't go far enough in bringing our state's deficit under control," I don't think anyone would have argued with him. But I'm pretty sure that's not what happened here.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Don't expect them to agree, and don't spend too much time on logic; just point out the absurdity. I think it's rather obvious to everyone, but the Perry crowd can't be expected to agree since that would be admitting guilt. An intelligent jury will take care of the guilt part.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
I merely posted the indictment, as a matter of fact (that it exists, and that it alleges certain things) in response to your post indicating that you had apparently not read it or thought it did not exist or had not been published.



Any assertions or comparisons beyond that are yours, and I would say not a matter of fact (and certainly not representative of my post). Again, I am here to discuss facts, not imagination or strawmen.
Click to expand...

The public indictment is NOT all the facts. These will come out during the ensuing investigation and court presentations.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

eohrnberger said:
The public indictment is NOT all the facts. These will come out during the ensuing investigation and court presentations.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the indictment lays out the case, whether or not they are the facts remains to be seen
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Removable Mind said:
As a native Texan, I agree. He isn't likable. As far as I'm concerned Perry's the worst Gov. ever. Bush was bad, but not nears a bad as Perry. But their being elected isn't a good testament about Texas voters. Texas voters are a strange bunch. Or have become strange over the last 25 years.

Perry's success has come from his handlers over the years. They can make him look good, but that's where it ends. When he opens his mouth...it's over. He's a prop. A moronic prop at that.
Click to expand...



Yes indeed.


Rick Perry was an Austin Democrat right up unto the point at which he became an indirect Exxon employee. Now it's hard to tell if he truly believes or ever did believe anything politically speaking.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

eohrnberger said:
The public indictment is NOT all the facts.
Click to expand...
Did anybody say it was?

eohrnberger said:
These will come out during the ensuing investigation and court presentations.
Click to expand...
Offhand I'd say all the facts of this case are already known. Would you care to hypothesize otherwise?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
Exactly, the indictment lays out the case, whether or not they are the facts remains to be seen
Click to expand...
Perry's public statements bear out the factuality of the indictment. He has, in essence, already admitted guilt to at least Count II of the indictment:


Count II
--------
Beginning on or about June 10, 2013, and continuing through June 14, 2013, in the County of Travis, Texas, by means of coercion, to-wit: threatening to veto legislation that had been approved and authorized by the Legislature of the State of Texas to provide funding for the continued operation of the Public integrity Unit of the Travis County District Attorney's Office unless Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg resigned from her official position as elected District Attorney, James Richard "Rick" Perry, intentionally or knowingly influenced or attempted to influence Rosemary Lehmberg, a public servant, namely, the elected District Attorney for Travis County, Texas, in the specifIc performance of her official duty, to-wit: the duty to continue to carry out her responsibilities as the elected District Attorney for the County of Travis, Texas through the completion of her elected term of office, and the defendant and Rosemary Lehmberg were not members of the same governing body of a governmental entity, such offense having been committed by defendant, a public servant, while acting in an official capacity as a public servant.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...out-threat-w-613-629-a-71.html#post1063651547
Click to expand...
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Fenton said:
Huh ?

He has the authority to cut funding.

The '' group" investigating him had to settle on this BS charge because they couldn't find anything else.

He doesn't have anyw to worry about.

Its not like he lied about the deaths of 4 Americans.
Click to expand...

You forget he's not a democrat.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
Perry's public statements bear out the factuality of the indictment. He has, in essence, already admitted guilt to at least Count II of the indictment:
Click to expand...

What he admitted doing was what the Constitution of TX allows him to do, veto a spending bill. You do realize that Elected Governors can veto Legislature passed bills? Did Rosemary Lehmberg lose her job?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
Perry's public statements bear out the factuality of the indictment. He has, in essence, already admitted guilt to at least Count II of the indictment:
Click to expand...

Wrong.
There is no influence of her duties at all.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Objective Voice said:
Yes, she did, but was it conducted in the performance of her duties?

You see, an elected official can be charged with misconduct and such could apply to her performance on and off duty. But that's not the charge levied against her. Her's is public intoxication. As such, was she drinking on or off the clock?

It may sound like semantics, but it really isn't. Regardless, I agree that she should have resigned. However, I disagree that she should be forced to do so by the TX Governor.
Click to expand...

Texas Code does provide for the removal from office of a public official for intoxication on or off-duty:

Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL. (a) An officer may be removed for:(
1) incompetency;
(2) official misconduct; or
(3) intoxication on or off duty caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 87. REMOVAL OF COUNTY OFFICERS FROM OFFICE; FILLING OF VACANCIES
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
Perry's public statements bear out the factuality of the indictment. He has, in essence, already admitted guilt to at least Count II of the indictment:
Click to expand...
Hmm...

What I'm getting here is that:
It's not illegal to veto funding for something.
It's not illegal to ask/demand an elected official resign.
However if you veto something specifically for the purpose of putting pressure on an elected official to resign, it's questionable at best and possibly illegal.

The problem is proving that things went down as stated in this Count II.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
This is frustrating, that article relates to Federal Minimum wage whereas over 20 plus states have their own, California is one of them. You cannot seem to grasp the concept that 1.6 million Californians made minimum wage and 500,000 Texans.
Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Zbh4bMK3PQ
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
She wasn't forced to resign, what part of that don't you understand?
Click to expand...

No, she wasn't forced to resign. There was an attempt to force her to resign, hence the indictment.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
Did anybody say it was?


Offhand I'd say all the facts of this case are already known. Would you care to hypothesize otherwise?
Click to expand...

These 2 statements seem to run contrary to each other. In one statement, is an acknowledgement that it's only 1/2 the story, facts, (or less) are known, and in the other, that all the facts are already known. So which is it? Or can't you decide what you think?

As stated, I don't think that all the facts are known, and they'll come out with further investigation and at trial. You've agreed with that in the first statement. Let's just go with that for now. :)
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Rick Perry is the definition of irony.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

danarhea said:
No, she wasn't forced to resign. There was an attempt to force her to resign, hence the indictment.
Click to expand...

That is the right of any employer or Governor and there is nothing illegal about it, just like there is nothing illegal about Perry vetoing funding regardless of the reason. Liberals believe they can do no wrong and are "entitled" to a job for life and when challenged they always seek legal relief. Liberals aren't going to like the court rulings. If it is a jury trial and they find 12 idiots who don't understand the responsibilities of the Governor the appeals court will overrule on the merits and the law. She is going to have a hard time proving that she was personally hurt by the Governor's action.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
That is the right of any employer or Governor and there is nothing illegal about it [...]
Click to expand...
First, the Travis County DA is employed by the people of Travis county. They did not try to fire her, and there is definitely a legal process for them to do so if they wish.

Second, it is most certainly not the right of the Governor to fire or force the resignation of an elected official, especially a county-elected official. Otherwise what is the point of even having an election?

Your argument seems more tailored for non-democratic governments like Russia, China, Iran, etc. Perhaps those are more Perry's style as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom