• 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

[...] She is going to have a hard time proving that she was personally hurt by the Governor's action.
She doesn't have to prove that. That's not even what the indictment is about :lamo
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

She doesn't have to prove that. That's not even what the indictment is about :lamo
The indictment was ridiculous. He did not interfere with her duties.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

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. :)

Well, the basics are known at this point, and not even an attorney with an ordinary practice is necessarily going to have a sophisticated understanding of the details of the law(s) on which this case may hinge. So I'm going to be paying attention to what legal experts say. Dershowitz has weighed in already, but it's Texas experts who are really going to understand the law. Here's what Dick DeGuerin, who is one of those experts, says:

“The defendant has a distinct advantage in this case, because the governor of Texas has an absolute veto power over legislation — and that's what he did in this case,” said Dick DeGuerin, a Houston attorney who has defended such high-profile clients as former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Legal experts call Perry indictment a stretch - San Antonio Express-News
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

The indictment was ridiculous. He did not interfere with her duties.
Had he been successful in forcing her to resign, she would have been unable to do her duties. No one can sanely argue with that.

Reading (the indictment) is not rocket science, folks :lamo
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Well, the basics are known at this point, and not even an attorney with an ordinary practice is necessarily going to have a sophisticated understanding of the details of the law(s) on which this case may hinge. So I'm going to be paying attention to what legal experts say. Dershowitz has weighed in already, but it's Texas experts who are really going to understand the law. Here's what Dick DeGuerin, who is one of those experts, says:

“The defendant has a distinct advantage in this case, because the governor of Texas has an absolute veto power over legislation — and that's what he did in this case,” said Dick DeGuerin, a Houston attorney who has defended such high-profile clients as former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Legal experts call Perry indictment a stretch - San Antonio Express-News

Well, there ya go. At least for now, until the judge and the court rules on the matter.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Had he been successful in forcing her to resign, she would have been unable to do her duties. No one can sanely argue with that.

Reading (the indictment) is not rocket science, folks :lamo
It is not an interference.
If she had resigned she would have had no duties to preform. :doh

The indictment is flawed.
It would be like saying the electorate not reelecting her would be interfering with her duties. When it simply isn't.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

[...] It would be like saying the electorate not reelecting her would be interfering with her duties. When it simply isn't.
If she were at the end of her term, seeking reelection, there would be no duties to perform were she not reelected. At the completion of her term, her duties would be completed as well. Were her term interrupted prematurely by Gov. GoodHair's threats, then her duties would be prematurely interrupted as well, in contravention of the desires of the electorate.

The flaw is in your argument(s), not the indictment.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

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.

Perry can veto anything he wants. However.....

1) He is not allowed to abuse his powers by making threats. That is a felony. The statute that applies is Texas 39.02DPS23990064

2) He is not allowed to pressure a public employee to resign by making a threat. That constitutes coercion, and is also a felony. The statute that applies is Texas 36.03DPS13990027
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

If she were at the end of her term, seeking reelection, there would be no duties to perform were she not reelected. At the completion of her term, her duties would be completed as well. Were her term interrupted prematurely by Gov. GoodHair's threats, then her duties would be prematurely interrupted as well, in contravention of the desires of the electorate.

The flaw is in your argument(s), not the indictment.
No the flaw is in the indictment.
And it is very similar to her not being reelected, as she would have no duties to preform if she resigned. As already stated.
There is no interference at all.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

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.

The Travis County DA is run by the Democrat Party, and they get their funding from the state of TX. Governor Perry on behalf of the people of TX vetoed funding that would have gone to the DA who has financial difficulties and now a DWI. Why would anyone want their tax dollars to be spent by this individual.

It is the right of the Governor to protect the taxpayers of this state and as I explained he did that. The facts in the case aren't known only the complaint which may or may not be fact. What Perry did was veto the funding part of the bill which was his right, The DA still has her job, you seem to not understand that.

As for being another country, yours seems to be one where an employee of the state gets to keep their job for life and there are no consequences for personal problems that could cost the state taxpayers money. Not exactly sure what your style is.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Well, the basics are known at this point, and not even an attorney with an ordinary practice is necessarily going to have a sophisticated understanding of the details of the law(s) on which this case may hinge. So I'm going to be paying attention to what legal experts say. Dershowitz has weighed in already, but it's Texas experts who are really going to understand the law. Here's what Dick DeGuerin, who is one of those experts, says:

“The defendant has a distinct advantage in this case, because the governor of Texas has an absolute veto power over legislation — and that's what he did in this case,” said Dick DeGuerin, a Houston attorney who has defended such high-profile clients as former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Legal experts call Perry indictment a stretch - San Antonio Express-News

Absolutely correct and that is the Bottom line

the governor of Texas has an absolute veto power over legislation

The DA still has her job, this is nothing more than total character destruction and taking out another threat. The liberals cannot win on ideas so they have to destroy the individual
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Perry can veto anything he wants. However.....

1) He is not allowed to abuse his powers by making threats. That is a felony. The statute that applies is Texas 39.02DPS23990064

2) He is not allowed to pressure a public employee to resign by making a threat. That constitutes coercion, and is also a felony. The statute that applies is Texas 36.03DPS13990027


First of all that so called threat is well within the powers of the Governor but she still has her job so she wasn't harmed personally in any way.

You don't think elected officials put pressure on people to resign all the time. You may not like it but that is reality. Again she still has her job so tell me how was she hurt by that threat?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

First of all that so called threat is well within the powers of the Governor but she still has her job so she wasn't harmed personally in any way.

You don't think elected officials put pressure on people to resign all the time. You may not like it but that is reality. Again she still has her job so tell me how was she hurt by that threat?

Abuse of power in a quid pro quo is still illegal. Perry's mistake was making it so overt.

As an example: A congressman has the legal power to vote for or against a piece of legislation. However, it's still illegal for that congressman to come out and say "if you pay me money, I'll vote for this!"
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Let it play out in court.

Not really rocket science.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

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.

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

First of all that so called threat is well within the powers of the Governor but she still has her job so she wasn't harmed personally in any way.

You don't think elected officials put pressure on people to resign all the time. You may not like it but that is reality. Again she still has her job so tell me how was she hurt by that threat?

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

... most independent people and legal types call it a reach at best and an abuse of process...
You have some polling data?
Sweet!

Share, dude. Link us up with that data.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

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.
Reading Conservative's spiel I can't help but read the reasoning as so:

Trading money for services is a perfectly wonderful thing to do.
Nothing illegal about trading money for services at all. It's just common sense.

So, just because some one trades a whore money for a blowjob or trades a politician money for influence, it's not illegal.
It's just people trading money for services rendered.
Trading money for services is not a crime.
People do it everyday.
Therefore prostitution and bribery are not crimes--they're just people trading goods for services

Idk if Perry committed a crime or not.
Honestly don't give a ****.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

It is not an interference.
If she had resigned she would have had no duties to preform. :doh

The indictment is flawed.
It would be like saying the electorate not reelecting her would be interfering with her duties. When it simply isn't.
Assuming it went down as accused, Perry basically said "resign or I'll cut funding to this program".

How is that NOT interference?
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Assuming it went down as accused, Perry basically said "resign or I'll cut funding to this program".

How is that NOT interference?
He has not interfered with her doing any aspect of her job.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

He has not interfered with her doing any aspect of her job.
Are you seriously claiming that demanding her resignation backed up by the threat of vetoing funding for a program in her department is not interfering?

Assuming that happened, at least, I'm unsure if it has been proven yet.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Are you seriously claiming that demanding her resignation backed up by the threat of vetoing funding for a program in her department is not interfering?

Assuming that happened, at least, I'm unsure if it has been proven yet.

I've taken a more cautious approach.

Naturally for many this will be cut down partisan lines no matter what happens.

But there's just so much noise around this whole thing we just have to wait and see what happens.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

Abuse of power in a quid pro quo is still illegal. Perry's mistake was making it so overt.

As an example: A congressman has the legal power to vote for or against a piece of legislation. However, it's still illegal for that congressman to come out and say "if you pay me money, I'll vote for this!"

But that's bribery of course, the legislator could say, "I'm not funding X because John runs it" and you know what, that could've happened in TX and the TX legislature could've even passed a resolution saying, "we're not funding this because John runs it and we won't fund it until he resigns" -- would you INDICT the legislature? Of course not, why? Because the decision to pass such legislation is a question for the legislature. A political question.

Same here, many are saying Perry possessed the power to veto the legislation but then quibble on the reason given beforehand. That's to say he has a unilateral and unqualified power to do something unless one doesn't like the condition attached? That's a veto threat, he's allowed to do that.

The statutes in question don't modify Perry's constitutional authority. 36.03 even excepts an action taken in the official capacity of the member of the governing body,

This indictment isn't going anywhere. It's going to play out one way: nonjusticiable political question......if anything the other side may have some problems on their hands, frankly that's the better question because really they should know better.....
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

I've taken a more cautious approach.

Naturally for many this will be cut down partisan lines no matter what happens.

But there's just so much noise around this whole thing we just have to wait and see what happens.
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.
 
Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

I agree that we know nothing for sure yet.

That's what bothers me so much about some of these supposed moral high horse partisan soldiers we got in this thread.

They've already made up their mind of his innocence or guilt before any real evidence has been shown.
 
Back
Top Bottom