• 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

Excon said:
You clearly know not of what you speak.
Click to expand...



If you're an 'Independent' then Hitler was a pacifist.



You're the most fanatically conservative independent I've seen.. lol (Though in all honesty you don't strike me as truly conservative at all, simply a pro-wealthy CONservative who claims to be an Independent)
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Excon said:
You have already been shown numerous times.
You just deny.
As for the prosecutor? His stature matters not. He is stretching the meaning here. He isn't above that.
Click to expand...

You have shown absolutely nothing. Poke a hole in this. I dare ya'. :mrgreen:

1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

8) Perry has been indicted for that.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Ryan5 said:
If you're an 'Independent' then Hitler was a pacifist.



You're the most fanatically conservative independent I've seen.. lol (Though in all honesty you don't strike me as truly conservative at all, simply a pro-wealthy CONservative who claims to be an Independent)
Click to expand...
Said the one who knows not of what he speaks. Figures.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

danarhea said:
You have shown absolutely nothing. Poke a hole in this. I dare ya'. :mrgreen:

1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

8) Perry has been indicted for that.
Click to expand...
The above crap has already been refuted by others.
All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Excon said:
The above crap has already been refuted by others.
All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.
Click to expand...

Refuted? In what way? Please be specific. Which number or numbers below are wrong, and why do you believe so?

1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

8) Perry has been indicted for that.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

danarhea said:
Refuted? In what way? Please be specific.
Click to expand...
You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
Holy ****.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Excon said:
You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
Holy ****.
Click to expand...

You are still not answering my question. Where is the hole in this?

1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

8) Perry has been indicted for that.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

danarhea said:
You are still not answering my question.
Click to expand...
What did you not understand about the following replies?
You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
Holy ****.


The above crap has already been refuted by others.
All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.
​

I am not going to rehash that of which you have already been shown wrong.
There is no need because you are in denial and do not know of what you speak.
Pointing out what others have already pointed out just will lead to more denials from you.
You refuse to learn from them, and I know will will refuse to learn from me.


You simply have no clue, just like you had no clue about what you claimed about James Ferguson.

So when the Governor walks on this crap, what are you going to say?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
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.
Click to expand...

Be honest - coercion is coercion, regardless of the goal the one doing the coercing is looking for. Politics is all about carrots and sticks - those who are elected to positions of power exercise that power, often through coercion. There's not a single personal benefit Perry was trying to realize - he was solely looking to have the DA do the right thing.

I'll give you another example. Was Nancy Pelosi guilty of a crime to be prosecuted when she tried to coerce Charlie Rangel into resigning after his difficulties and when he didn't, removed him from his leadership positions in the Democrat House? How about when she did the same thing with William Jefferson, the Louisianna congressman indicted on bribery charges, even after he was reelected? Aren't those examples of a politician in a position of power using that power to get a politician to do the right thing?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Objective Voice said:
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.
Click to expand...

The point isn't, have Presidents done it - the point is, can Presidents do it.

And again, it's pretty sad when an action is indictable when you're honest about it but not indictable when you're dishonest about it. What you're suggesting is that politicians are better off being dishonest. That's a sad commentary on politics in America.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Karl said:
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.
Click to expand...

You're so blinded by your own ideology. "An intelligent jury will take care of the guilt part" - what's that, guilty until proven innocent and if he's proven innocent it must be that the jury was stupid? I'm not "the Perry crowd" - I think Perry is basically an idiot, but that doesn't mean that I approve of abusing the judicial system in order to rid government of idiots. Hell, it that was the only criteria, you could clean out most political offices.

You're simply obsessed with taking down a prominent Republican Governor - you fairly salivate at the possibility. You're not wasting time on logic because to do so would divert you from the agenda. It's fine to have that agenda, but don't spout nonsense about holding the higher ground when you transparently don't.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Hatuey said:
Oh, you mean the facts back me up? Well. Alright. The facts back me up. This is no different than Obama vetoing any bill until all Republicans resign. Not only is it unethical, it's downright tyrannical. Would you be in favor of a Democrat governor using his vetoing power to get officials to resign? Doubt it. So yeah, I'm not in favor of this whether it's a Republican/Democrat doing it. It's nonsensical. If you're going to veto funding for a department, do it on the grounds that it's wasteful. Not on the grounds that you want person X to resign.
Click to expand...

Sorry - you misunderstand. I didn't ask if you liked it or didn't like it - I asked you if it was legal. Could the President threaten to veto a bill if all Republicans didn't resign? The absurdity of your equating what Perry did to what you propose, notwithstanding, what's illegal about it? It would be impractical because the President would be under incredible pressure and such action would likely cause him to lose reelection if he ran again, but he wouldn't be indicted.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Another example, for those interested.

Didn't senior members of the US Congress coerce President Nixon into resigning on threat of an impeachment proceeding? How is that any different than what was attempted here by Perry?
 
hurdles debaters face when interacting with the general public

A revelation as to some of the hurdles debaters face when interacting with the general public.

newpublius said:
The TX Constitution vests authority in Perry to veto whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants and he can threaten and posture accordingly...
Click to expand...
Texas constitution would allow Perry to use his veto threat to blackmail someone to submit to his sexual advances?
That's both fascinating and surreal.
Unrealistically simplistic actually, but what can one do?


CanadaJohn said:
Didn't senior members of the US Congress coerce President Nixon into resigning on threat of an impeachment proceeding? How is that any different than what was attempted here by Perry?
Click to expand...
There're many differences.
To start though, the US president wasn't subject to the particular Texas laws we're discussing.
In the US, states can have laws that only apply inside of those states.
The Texas laws we're discussing are those kinds of laws.

I hope that helps you get one of the main differences.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Jaaaman said:
67171555
Click to expand...
ftr, Perry was indicted by the grand jury (led by some guy named Crum).
:shrug:

...but facts are such ephemeral things, yes?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

danarhea said:
Seems you have a problem with the law. Take that up with the State of Texas. Those 2 laws have been on the books for more than a century.
Click to expand...

Lived here 22 years, been in court many times as a witness and the DA did not lose her job, TX Governor has the right to veto a bill, where was the abuse of power? The courts are going to decide and some leftwingers aren't going to like the decision, IMO
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Conservative said:
The courts are going to decide and some leftwingers aren't going to like the decision, IMO
Click to expand...

You seem pretty sure about that.

Not that I think one way or the other til things actually start happening but I remember another time you were really sure about something before...

Conservative said:
This time next year President Romney
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
Better get used to President Romney and VP Ryan
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
in November the electorate is going to elect an experienced person in Romney
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
What you don't seem to understand is President Romney
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
Isn't fun watching the next President of the United States, Mitt Romney?
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
It is going to be a long, disappointing night for you on November 6
Click to expand...

Sorry Conservative, you don't belong in the prediction business.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Ryan5 said:
Please..

Rick Perry might as well wear an oil industry shirt to work every day. He's their guy.

That said, what's it really matter?

-Rick Perry nationally is seen as an idiot.

-Rick Perry in Texas itself is seen as an idiot by every liberal, independent and everything in between.

-Rick Perry is a business conservative. In other words, he's a fake. He's a walking contradiction who quotes Ayn Rand on one hand (an atheist) and on the other hand preaches anti gay biblical statements. The man is an ideological nothing.

He gives con men a bad name for his sloppiness. If you're going to lie, at least make your lies not ideologically contradict one another.
Click to expand...

This is the best you can bring to the discussion? Here's my post to which you are responding:

First, historically, Texas Democrats have been pretty conservative. Second, Perry was 34 in 1984 and is now 64. It's just as easy to think that his political thinking evolved as it is to deride him for "playing Democrat."

In what way does Perry "make no bones" about being "in it for the money"? Again, links please.

I guess you're just not going to bring much to the ongoing discussion. :2wave:
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Jetboogieman said:
You seem pretty sure about that.

Not that I think one way or the other til things actually start happening but I remember another time you were really sure about something before...










Sorry Conservative, you don't belong in the prediction business.
Click to expand...

When it comes to the law, I am a lot more accurate. Perry had the right to veto the legislation for whatever reason and the so called threat to the DA was irrelevant as she still has her job. I am however very happy that over all these years you pay attention to what I say
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

The Mark said:
Indeed.

But Excon seems to be arguing that even IF Perry did as accused, it does not constitute interference.

That makes no sense to me, so I'm arguing with him under the assumption of the accusation being true, for the sake of argument.

I agree that we know nothing for sure yet.
Click to expand...

If Rick Perry admitted his guilt, Excon would be arguing Perry was wrong. :lamo
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

newpublius said:
Veto threats are legal, Karl.
Click to expand...

Using veto threats to overrule the will of the people is not legal.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

nota bene said:
Good thing none of the Sheriff's Office employees decided to make a deal out of what DA Lehmberg said to them then, eh? Because she definitely was abusing her office when she told them that they'd be the ones who'd end up in jail. ;)
Click to expand...

Nice attempt at deflection. This isn't about what the Sheriff's office did or didn't do. It's about Perry and his abuse of power. I wonder if he will wear the same white uniform the other inmates do here in Texas. Maybe we could ship him off to Arpaio in Arizona, especially if he likes bologna.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

newpublius said:
Statutes do NOT modify constitutions. Do you understand what that means? It means the TX legislature cannot, by statute, qualify the constitutional authority of the Governor.
Click to expand...

How ignorant can a position be? These laws have been of the books for decades, now you say they're not even constitutional? May I suggest you worry about that fat, sack-of-**** governor you have in New Jersey and let Texas take care of Perry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom