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

I didn't understand until about 5 minutes ago one of the issues in this case. Tom Delay appeared on "Fox and Friends" being interviewed by Steve Doocy, so I stopped on the way to the kitchen and stood there and listened. The Public Integrity Unit is a county unit with statewide reach. Why is that?

And that's not right.

I agree with Delay, whose political career was ruined by this Unit and then-DA Ronnie Earle, that the Legislature needs to fix this.

Yes, I know, "Fox and Friends." Tom Delay. Hoping we can spare bandwidth here by bypassing predictable comments on them.

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

Texmex said:

Are you dense? Whether or not she was drunk or not doesn't change the fact that it is none of Perry's business.

Click to expand...

The taxpayer money in the state of TX is Perry's responsibility. Why would you give any money to someone so irresponsible? Perry did the right thing and what he was legally obligated to do.

This argument is getting old. The DA did not lose her job, so where is the personal harm?

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

danarhea said:

Once again, you are missing the point. The issue is not about the Governor's right to veto funds. He has every right to do that. However, he commits a felony when he uses that power to threaten a State of Texas employee. He wasn't indicted for using his veto. He was indicted for using his office to make threats.

Click to expand...

Pretty simple question, did the DA lose her job? What threat would that be that would PERSONALLY hurt the DA?

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

Simon W. Moon said:

She's already been tried and convicted, and served her time.

Click to expand...

I'm glad she went in.

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

danarhea said:

Once again, you are missing the point. The issue is not about the Governor's right to veto funds. He has every right to do that. However, he commits a felony when he uses that power to threaten a State of Texas employee. He wasn't indicted for using his veto. He was indicted for using his office to make threats.

Click to expand...

His threat was to use his veto power. Obama does it all the time. Even left wingers think this indictment is completely political. You may support it because you hate Perry but next time it could be someone you like.

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

Tom Delay said this morning that he thinks it's totally unconstitutional for a local agency to have statewide jurisdiction. He also said, "These people for 30 years have been doing this to their enemies, Democrat or Republican, and they've intimidated the Legislature because they're only accountable to the voters of Travis County, which is the most liberal county in Texas, if not the nation."

Video here: Tom DeLay calls Texas Gov. Rick Perry's indictment a

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

X Factor said:

His threat was to use his veto power. Obama does it all the time.

Click to expand...

Is there anyway in which a threat of a veto could be used illegally?

If so, if there is a way that a veto threat could be used illegally, then to form a full and actual rebuttal it would be necessary to also establish that Perry's veto threat was not used illegally.

What if I were a governor and I issued a threat to veto legislation unless someone consented to sexual advances?
Would that be a legal use of a veto threat?
If not, if there is any way in which a veto threat could be used illegally, then the reply that you have provided does not go far enough.

The fact that Perry threatened to use his veto power is generally established already.
It's also established that vetoes are a power of that executive office.
That's also a given.

The allegation is that he used the threat of a veto in an illegal manner--a manner which comports to the specifics of the laws cited in the indictment.

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

nota bene said:

I didn't understand until about 5 minutes ago one of the issues in this case. Tom Delay appeared on "Fox and Friends" being interviewed by Steve Doocy, so I stopped on the way to the kitchen and stood there and listened. The Public Integrity Unit is a county unit with statewide reach. Why is that?

And that's not right.

I agree with Delay, whose political career was ruined by this Unit and then-DA Ronnie Earle, that the Legislature needs to fix this.

Yes, I know, "Fox and Friends." Tom Delay. Hoping we can spare bandwidth here by bypassing predictable comments on them.

Click to expand...

Ask the Republicans....

Texas Senate:
Republican - 19
Democrat - 11

Texas House:
Republican - 95
Democrat - 55

Gov. - Perry (R)
Lt Gov. - Dewhurst (R)


Speaking of Ronnie Earle, between 1978 and 2008 (when he retired) he prosecuted 19 elected officials, just five of whom were Republicans.

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

Simon W. Moon said:

Is there anyway in which a threat of a veto could be used illegally?

If so, if there is a way that a veto threat could be used illegally, then to form a full and actual rebuttal it would be necessary to also establish that Perry's veto threat was not used illegally.

What if I were a governor and I issued a threat to veto legislation unless someone consented to sexual advances?
Would that be a legal use of a veto threat?
If not, if there is any way in which a veto threat could be used illegally, then the reply that you have provided does not go far enough.

The fact that Perry threatened to use his veto power is generally established already.
It's also established that vetoes are a power of that executive office.
That's also a given.

The allegation is that he used the threat of a veto in an illegal manner--a manner which comports to the specifics of the laws cited in the indictment.

Click to expand...

That is your opinion and apparently nothing is going to change your mind. This apparently is something you want to be true but the reality is Rick Perry could not Fire the DA so he did what any good manager would do, withhold funds for part of the office until another replacement could be found that just might be more responsible than someone who was driving under the influence threatening innocent taxpayers. The DA still has her job so where is the ethics violation? By the way what ever happened to the indictment against Tom DeLay?

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

Conservative said:

That is your opinion and apparently nothing is going to change your mind.

Click to expand...

By "that" do you mean the idea that an allegation that Perry used his veto power inappropriately is not actually countered by saying that Perry used his veto power?

Conservative said:

This apparently is something you want to be true...

Click to expand...

What exactly do you mean when you say "This"?
My notion that, "Perry used his veto power," is not the opposite of, "Perry used his veto power inappropriately?"

Conservative said:

The DA still has her job so where is the ethics violation?

Click to expand...

The charges are spelled out in the indictment.
The indictment's available online.
If you would like to read the indictment, I can provide a link to it again.

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

Simon W. Moon said:

By "that" do you mean the idea that an allegation that Perry used his veto power inappropriately is not actually countered by saying that Perry used his veto power?

What exactly do you mean when you say "This"?
My notion that, "Perry used his veto power," is not the opposite of, "Perry used his veto power inappropriately?"


The charges are spelled out in the indictment.
The indictment's available online.
If you would like to read the indictment, I can provide a link to it again.

Click to expand...

No, the idea that you don't understand the authority of the governor and the fact that he couldn't fire the DA. There is no reason required to veto legislation and there was no harm personally done to the DA. You want this to be true therefore you are the one making a big deal of it. You aren't going to like the Court's decision. I asked you what happened to the indictment against DeLay??

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

So Rick Perry doesn't want government corruption investigated?

That's something to campaign on.

"I'm going to Washington and I'm not going to clean it up!"

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

Thorgasm said:

So Rick Perry doesn't want government corruption investigated?

That's something to campaign on.

"I'm going to Washington and I'm not going to clean it up!"

Click to expand...

You think giving money to an irresponsible public service is ethically correct?

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

Conservative said:

You think giving money to an irresponsible public service is ethically correct?

Click to expand...

Yes, apparently the Texas legislature did too.

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

Thorgasm said:

Yes, apparently the Texas legislature did too.

Click to expand...

Texas has the line item veto for the Governor and the Legislature has the ability to override that veto, did they do it? Wonder why I don't hear about ethic's violations by a Democrat like Obama who does the same thing, or Pelosi, Reid? Double standards? Naw, couldn't be that

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

Conservative said:

Texas has the line item veto for the Governor and the Legislature has the ability to override that veto, did they do it? Wonder why I don't hear about ethic's violations by a Democrat like Obama who does the same thing, or Pelosi, Reid? Double standards? Naw, couldn't be that

Click to expand...

I know, Democrats are ugly, stupid, ebil, and have poor hygiene.

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

Thorgasm said:

I know, Democrats are ugly, stupid, ebil, and have poor hygiene.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but I sure wasn't when I spent much of my life as a Democrat

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

Conservative said:

No, the idea that you don't understand the authority of the governor and the fact that he couldn't fire the DA.

Click to expand...

See, I think you are mistaken that I do not understand those two items.
Both of those things are quite clear and not being debated.
No one has said that the Texas governor does not have the power to veto. No one has said that Perry could have fired Lehmberg.

What is being debated [or rather should be debated] is whether or not Perry's use of the veto threat in this instance was legal or not.
The indictment makes the case that it was not legal.
The indictment cites Texas law and shows how what was done matches the specifics of that Texas law.
Logically, debate should be centered on whether or not the bill of particulars is correct, and if it is correct does the law apply to the governor.
Sadly, hardly a soul seems interested in the pertinent questions about this issue.

"Perry can threaten to veto," is not the opposite of "Perry used the threat of a veto inappropriately."
It's quite possible for Perry to have the power to threaten to veto AND for that power to be mis-used.

The actual and real question is whether or not Perry did mis-use the power as stated in the indictment (which I could link to if you decided to read it).

Conservative said:

There is no reason required to veto legislation and there was no harm personally done to the DA.

Click to expand...

You still haven't read the indictment have you?
The indictment does not charge Perry with not having a reason to veto the legislation, nor does it allege that there was some personal harm done to Lehmberg.
You're defending Perry against charges that have not been made.
I really would be glad to give another link to the indictment if you wanted to read it.

Conservative said:

You want this to be true therefore you are the one making a big deal of it.

Click to expand...

The "this" this time is that a governor must have a reason to veto legislation and that Lehmberg has been personally harmed?
Not sure why you keep wanting to talk about me instead of the topic at hand. I am not interesting in the least. Plus, what you imagine I think is not accurate.
go figure
:shrug:

Conservative said:

You aren't going to like the Court's decision.

Click to expand...

I won't like or dislike the jury's verdict no matter what it is.
If you would use what I have actually written to make your assessments about me instead of whatever you're using, you might have noticed that already.

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

Simon W. Moon said:

See, I think you are mistaken that I do not understand those two items.
Both of those things are quite clear and not being debated.
No one has said that the Texas governor does not have the power to veto. No one has said that Perry could have fired Lehmberg.

What is being debated [or rather should be debated] is whether or not Perry's use of the veto threat in this instance was legal or not.
The indictment makes the case that it was not legal.
The indictment cites Texas law and shows how what was done matches the specifics of that Texas law.
Logically, debate should be centered on whether or not the bill of particulars is correct, and if it is correct does the law apply to the governor.
Sadly, hardly a soul seems interested in the pertinent questions about this issue.

"Perry can threaten to veto," is not the opposite of "Perry used the threat of a veto inappropriately."
It's quite possible for Perry to have the power to threaten to veto AND for that power to be mis-used.

The actual and real question is whether or not Perry did mis-use the power as stated in the indictment (which I could link to if you decided to read it).

You still haven't read the indictment have you?
The indictment does not charge Perry with not having a reason to veto the legislation, nor does it allege that there was some personal harm done to Lehmberg.
You're defending Perry against charges that have not been made.
I really would be glad to give another link to the indictment if you wanted to read it.


The "this" this time is that a governor must have a reason to veto legislation and that Lehmberg has been personally harmed?
Not sure why you keep wanting to talk about me instead of the topic at hand. I am not interesting in the least. Plus, what you imagine I think is not accurate.
go figure
:shrug:


I won't like or dislike the jury's verdict no matter what it is.
If you would use what I have actually written to make your assessments about me instead of whatever you're using, you might have noticed that already.

Click to expand...

Tom DeLay was indicted as well, what was the outcome in the courts? You believe an indictment is a conviction and of course it isn't. That will come out in trial and what you are going to find is that there was no personal harm done to the DA and Perry exercised his Constitutional rights as Governor. Doesn't matter what the reason is, the law is on his side whereas the leftwing public opinion isn't surprising.

Yes, I read the indictment and stand by my statement, with no harm done there is no case

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

Conservative said:

You believe an indictment is a conviction and of course it isn't.

Click to expand...

Why are you deliberately lying about what Simon has stated?

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

Thorgasm said:

Why are you deliberately lying about what Simon has stated?

Click to expand...

Simon has stated that the facts are in the indictment and that isn't true at all, the facts will come out in trial, the indictment lists the charges. Why are you trolling?

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

nota bene said:

Tom Delay said this morning that he thinks it's totally unconstitutional for a local agency to have statewide jurisdiction. [...]

Click to expand...

:lamo

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

Thorgasm said:

Why are you deliberately lying about what Simon has stated?

Click to expand...

It's a strawman. It's what some do when they don't have an argument.... they make something up and attribute it to their opponent. It only works if your target audience is rather dumb.

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

Simon W. Moon said:

[...] You still haven't read the indictment have you? [...]

Click to expand...

The Perry supporters cannot acknowledge the indictment, since it is self-explanatory. Instead they must take you on a circuitous b.s. tour of anything and everything that has nothing to do with the indictment (constitutional law, the DA herself, partisan politics, etc). If asked specific questions about the indictment or the grand jury they must refuse to answer since -- again -- it is all quite self-explanatory and, in reality (another problem for the Perry supporters and the hard right in general) it makes pretty good sense (whether or not it is a 'stretch' as some pundits have labeled it).

So -- you'll not get an honest debate from anyone supporting Perry on this issue. Best not to waste your breath addressing them directly.

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

Karl said:

It's a strawman. It's what some do when they don't have an argument.... they make something up and attribute it to their opponent. It only works if your target audience is rather dumb.

Click to expand...

So let me see if I got this right, you didn't say that the facts were listed in the Indictment? Seems that it is you that has a problem with no argument.