Posted on 08/17/2014 10:30:59 AM PDT by lowbridge
It didn’t take long for Michael McCrum to become a bull’s-eye for Republicans outraged by the felony charges against Gov. Rick Perry.
But those who know the 57-year-old McCrum say the sweeping partisan attacks against him won’t stick.
As the special prosecutor in the Perry case, McCrum is a veteran attorney — and former cop in Dallas and Arlington — who’s been on both sides in legal skirmishes.
He’s got plenty of fans, both Democrats and Republicans. And his political leanings largely are muted.
-snip
McCrum, in announcing the indictment Friday, dismissed the notion that the Perry investigation was driven by politics because the grand jury was in Democrat-heavy Travis County.
“That didn’t go into my consideration whatsoever. I looked at the law. I looked at the facts and I presented everything possible to the grand jury,” McCrum said.
McCrum was selected as the special prosecutor by a Republican judge.
Earlier, he enjoyed bipartisan support for what would have been the crowning accomplishment of his career — being named by President Barack Obama as the U.S. attorney in San Antonio.
McCrum had the backing of Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin and the state’s two Republican senators, Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn.
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
Obama probably threatened him.
I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to talk to you about buying if you believe any elected official is not political.
They are criminalizing politics.
If the governor is wrong, a judge can order the money reinstated. Or the legislature can demand it. A felony prosecution yet another abuse of power.
The White Hut Lizard Queen picked up the phone.
The whole thing is so crazy that the prosecutor should be run out of Texas while wearing a tar and feathers outfit.
The Grand Jury was stacked by leftists, many chosen by drunken Rosemary herself. I hear many of them were on the Davis campaign too.
This is partisan on it’s face. Ergo the prosecutor is partisan and Perry should go after him criminally violating Texas law.
Bullshi...er..bull Obamabrains.
Who’s his boss? Anyone know? Anyone have any background on his boss?
The Dallas Morning News is a liberal rag (I have been avoiding reading its contents for the last 30 years), the southwestern equivalent of the NYT.
I'm disappointed in Perry here, because he is wrong. It is not up to Perry to try to force the resignation of an elected official. That up to the voters, or up to a legislative body (impeachment).
But you are absolutely correct. A possibly unconstitutional veto should not be seen as a criminal offense. It is just something that needs to be looked at by a judge.
If this indictment is allowed to stand, it will set a very dangerous precedent.
And if Perry's veto is allowed to stand, that also would set a very dangerous precedent.
Valerie Plame prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was supposedly nonpartisan. He was even vouched for by the reliably conservative prosecutor Andrew McCarthy. But his actions in repeatedly dragging Scooter Libby and Karl Rover before a Grand Jury in order to catch them in a process crime having nothing to do with the original case speaks most eloquently about the type of person -- and type of partisan -- he really is.
Any time you hear the media claiming a prosecutor is non-partisan, you can make book on his being a Democrat. It's a lock.
Are there parameter requirements for a veto? I was always of the understanding that a veto could be made for any reason whatsoever. If the legislature opposed the veto, they could override it. I had always thought that that was the correction for a veto, for whatever reason the veto was made.
I can’t recall any veto by any elected executive that wasn’t for political reasons. This whole thing is absurd. That doesn’t mean that in 2014 America it won’t be successful.
A defense attorney whose client killed two men in a drunken crash found himself before the same judge Friday, accused of contempt for allegedly telling a witness to disappear so prosecutors could not recall her during the trial.
McCrum won the contempt case on a technicality, BTW. After he was found in contempt an appeals court vacated the order on a procedural basis. Essentially, the DA had four months to act and did not file in time. Imagine any one of "the little people" being let off the hook for felony witness tampering because of what is effectively a four months [!]statute of limitations.
Note also that McCrum never denied he told the witness to disappear so the prosecution wouldn't find her. In his defense he argued two things: 1) The judge hadn't made it clear that the witness might be recalled, therefore it was not improper to tell her to disappear and 2) Before the appeals board he claimed that the DA hadn't asked for contempt within the statutory period.
McCrum never disputed the witness' sworn affidavit that he had told her to vanish.
This guy is scum.
Assuming that the Texas Constitution is crafted in the same way as is the US Constitution then the Governor doesn't have the power,under that Constitution,to unilaterally enact legislation *or* to unilaterally block legislation from being enacted.OTOH,the houses of the Texas legislature,jointly or individually,have the power to do *both* things.
But will a jury of Austin welfare recipients have the collective IQ to understand this? I know damn well that a *Boston* jury wouldn't...maybe the residents of Texas's state capital are smarter.
But I doubt it.
Since Obama likes him and appointed him he would be scum, liberal scum at that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.