A move to ry to keep Perry off the 2016 ballot?
Even David Alexrod says the indictment is bogus (and will blow back on BO)
Good Lord.
The Dems are about to make a hero of a gutless, frat boy corrupt crony capitalist RINO.
I hear Austin is the anti-Texas part of Texas..
Or should I say, a liberal enclave.. Surrounded by sane Texans all around?
GJs indict cold tamales in TRavis Co.
It is a farce. I just hope Perry’s knees don’t buckle the way Tom DeLay’s did. Perry needs to cowboy up and get in the faces of these commie ‘RATS. Put THEM in jail.
Looks like prosecutor misconduct and abuse to me.
It is a farce Rick. This is going to backfire on the Dems so bad.
From a post at:
http://acahnman.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-more-complete-picture-of-rosemary.html
Thursday, October 17, 2013
A More Complete Picture of Rosemary Lehmberg’s Drinking
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Interesting:
Does Rosemary Lehmberg have a drinking problem?
The embattled Travis County District Attorney says no. She contends her DWI was a one-time mistake.
Others say Lehmberg may be an alcoholic, and there is new evidence supporting claim. It comes in the form of receipt after receipt after receipt. Lawyers subpoenaed Twin Liquors for records of Lehmberg’s purchases. It shows in a 15 month period, Lehmberg bought 72 bottles of Cirroc vodka.
….
When going through filings he found receipts from seven different Twin Liquors stores. They show Lehmberg’s credit card was used to buy more than $3,000 in vodka. The 72 bottles purchased Total more than 23 gallons.
“If somebody is buying 23 gallons of vodka within 15 months’ time, is caught with it, three times the legal limit all those things, being that coherent, all suggest that Ms. Lehmberg has probably had some sort of problem for a long time,” O’Brien charged.
He also noticed something else. “She would always go to a different store every two weeks or so to buy her next stash of vodka.”
Some Thoughts:
- 72 bottles of vodka in 15 months translates to 4 1/2 bottles per month; that’s not necessarily a problem level, but it’s close.
- This is only a record of her credit card purchases at Twin Liquors. How much did she purchase at other locations?!? How frequently did she pay with cash?!?
- That being said, the reason for Lehmberg’s removal is her willingness to abuse the power of her office, not her personal party habits; unfortunately, this development indicates that there could be another incident in the future.
- - - - -
Also Brietbart has this:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/08/15/Political-Payback-Rick-Perry-Indictment
Subpoenaed receipts from Twin Liquors showed her buying 72 bottles of Cirroc vodka—totaling more than 23 gallons—in a 15-month period, and that Lehmberg spread her purchases out among different stores.
This amount only covers purchases made with her credit card at that one liquor store chain, not cash purchases or alcohol obtained elsewhere.
- - - - -
Alcoholism is a terrible addiction. It appears this woman is an alcoholic and needs help. The greatest act of kindness in the videos are the officers who were so patient with her and they saved her life by puling her over and arresting her. She should be glad they saved her life! And as a sign of responsibility and respect she should have resigned because her behavior is not that of a professional district attorney. In fact it is the behavior of a common criminal.
I just watched Perry’s 6 min. statement on youtube and have to say he was not as polished as I expected. In this particular case I hope and expect he will come out on top, but for 2016 the GOP must field a 100% reliable communicator. The transition to the border issue at the end didn’t work for me.
It’s a badge of honor. Perry needs to shout this from the rooftops. His pressman needs to pull every political indictment by Dems for the last fifty years and how much worse it has gotten. Show just how they’ve corrupted the system over time.
Perry/Walker - let’s win.
Let’s start with Count Two, Coercion of a Public Servant, since the most commentary has been offered concerning this count. Here is the relevant statute: Texas Penal Code 36.03:
§ 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER. (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:
(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty; or
(2) influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the coercion is a threat to commit a felony, in which event it is a felony of the third degree.
Subsection (1) is the relevant part. The indictment claims Perry attempted to influence Rosemary Lehmberg “in the specific performance of her official duty” to “continue to carry out her responsibilities as the elected district attorney for the County of Travis through the completion of her elected term of office.”
If the statute did not contain an exception, this language would be absurdly overbroad. In Texas, “coercion” includes a threat “to take or withhold action as a public servant, or to cause a public servant to take or withhold action.” So, without an exception, the language of the statute would criminalize any threat by a public servant to influence a public official in the performance of their duty. To take an (unrelated) example, if someone in government told their employee: “tell the truth to the legislature or I will fire you,” someone could claim they were thereby trying to prevent a public official from doing their duty through “coercion.” (So, if such a law applied to the federal government, then Barack Obama could not threaten to fire a top official for, say, lying to Congress. It would be legally prohibited, rather than what it is: legal, but impossible to imagine.)
So the law can’t be that broad, and in fact, the statute has an exception:
(c) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (a)(1) of this section that the person who influences or attempts to influence the public servant is a member of the governing body of a governmental entity, and that the action that influences or attempts to influence the public servant is an official action taken by the member of the governing body. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “official action” includes deliberations by the governing body of a governmental entity.