Texas AG Ken Paxton Won’t Face Federal Corruption Charges as He Gains Momentum for Likely Senate Run

Texas AG Ken Paxton Won’t Face Federal Corruption Charges as He Gains Momentum for Likely Senate Run

by Kayla Guo, The Texas Tribune

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Attorney General Ken Paxton has spent much of his career, which has taken him to the heights of Republican politics, trailed by a raft of criminal and civil accusations.

But in the final days of the Biden administration, The Associated Press reported Thursday, the Justice Department defused the most serious legal threat he faced — a federal criminal probe into allegations of corruption — by declining to prosecute and effectively ending the investigation.

With the investigation over, Paxton has nearly cleared his crowded slate of career-threatening legal battles, just as he gears up for a likely 2026 primary run against U.S. Sen. John Cornyn.

“The end of this investigation is both politically and personally a huge boon for Ken Paxton,” said Matthew Wilson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University. “Paxton can point to that and say, ‘You see, even under a Democratic administration, they didn’t feel that there was anything there that merited moving forward.’”

Two sources familiar with the issue, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, told the AP of the Justice Department’s decision, including that it was made while President Joe Biden was still in office. The DOJ did not immediately respond to questions about confirming the AP report.

The development extends a multiyear string of legal victories vindicating the once-embattled Republican. It underscores Paxton’s durability through all manner of political, personal and legal troubles and helps burnish his reputation among the right wing of his party as a fighter who, like President Donald Trump, has defied numerous efforts by his detractors to take him down.

“It really sets up those parallels to Trump that will play very well among the Republican primary electorate,” Wilson said. “Paxton is a political survivor. People have written his obituary a couple of times, and he has really forged this loyal base among the grassroots activists in the Republican Party.”

Paxton’s attorney Dan Cogdell said he learned of the outcome from the AP because the Justice Department never notified him of its decision not to prosecute.

“The fact that they declined prosecution is not a surprise,” Cogdell said. “I don’t really think they ever had a case to begin with.”

There was little concern that the case would continue under the Trump administration’s Justice Department, given Paxton’s close alliance with the president.

In January, the Texas Supreme Court tossed the State Bar of Texas’ lawsuit against Paxton over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election won by Biden.

Prosecutors last year dropped felony securities fraud charges against Paxton just three weeks before he was set to face trial, after he agreed to perform 100 hours of community service, take 15 hours of legal ethics courses and pay $271,000 in restitution to those he was accused of defrauding more than a decade ago. The deal ended a nearly nine-year-old felony case that had dogged Paxton since his early days in office.

And when the state Legislature sought to impeach him for the same allegations of corruption that spurred the federal investigation, the Texas Senate acquitted him of 16 charges of bribery, abuse of office and obstruction – charges that more than 70% of his own party had supported in the House.

Paxton’s last outstanding legal battle is a whistleblower lawsuit filed against him by four of the former senior aides who reported him to the FBI, who allege that he fired them improperly after they spoke out. The Texas Supreme Court said in November that Paxton would not have to sit for a deposition in the lawsuit — another win for the attorney general, who has managed to avoid testifying about the corruption allegations through the civil lawsuit, his impeachment trial and the federal investigation. Paxton last year said he would no longer contest the facts of the case in order to end what he called “wasteful litigation” and a distraction for his office.

The whistleblowers are now waiting on a Travis County district judge to rule on a settlement.

“DOJ clearly let political cowardice impact its decision. The whistleblowers — all strong conservatives — did the right thing and continue to stand by their allegations of Paxton’s criminal conduct,” TJ Turner and Tom Nesbitt, attorneys for some of the whistleblowers, told the AP in a statement.

On Thursday, Paxton referenced the end of the federal investigation to take a swing at Cornyn, who has been critical of Paxton’s legal controversies and steadfast in his bid for reelection.

“This former TX Supreme Court Justice and TX Attorney General ignored the rule of law, the Constitution, and innocent until proven guilty while standing with the corrupt Biden DOJ cheering on the bogus witch hunts against both me and President Trump,” Paxton posted on social media in reference to Cornyn, adding, “Care to comment now, John?”

In response to an attempt by Paxton to tag Cornyn as insufficiently conservative and supportive of Trump, Cornyn had said, “Hard to run from prison, Ken.”

The likely matchup could prove to be Cornyn’s toughest primary battle yet as Texas Republican primary voters lurch toward the right and his popularity among GOP voters drops from 2020 highs.

Among Republican-identifying voters, according to polling by the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin, Cornyn has a 49% approval rating, compared to Paxton’s 62% approval rating. Texas’ other senator, Ted Cruz, meanwhile, has an approval rating of 78% among Republicans.

Still, Cornyn, who has trounced past challengers, is a prodigious fundraiser and wields widespread influence as a senior senator. He has also worked to smooth over his relationship with the hard-right in Texas and tout his work in the Senate in support of Trump.

On Thursday, Cornyn declined to comment on Paxton or the Justice Department decision not to prosecute, saying he was “not going to have any comments about that until he’s an announced candidate. Then I’ll have a lot to say.”

In response to a request for comment, Cornyn’s campaign, meanwhile, sent an endorsement from the National Border Patrol Council that was announced Thursday.

Cruz declined to comment.

“Fundamentally, he’s a fighter, and he’s also a risk-taker,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and the former Travis County GOP chair, describing Paxton’s position heading into a potential campaign with the federal investigation behind him. “What I think this whole episode taught him is, trust your instincts and never quit. The psychology of that has to be very powerful for him in approaching this race.”

Katharine Wilson of The Texas Tribune and Vianna Davila with ProPublica contributed reporting.

 

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them

by Andrew Egger

You can drive yourself crazy, listening to these admin people lie and spin. Every day they shamelessly open new vistas into kaleidoscopic alternate realities; staying moored here in the real world, among the things that have actually happened, is harder after a while than you’d think.

So it’s nice when we get palate-cleansing days like yesterday—when the lies are so obvious, so transparent and crude on their face, that it’s effortless to conclude: Yeah, these folks are just utterly full of shit.

Yesterday morning, JD Vance described Kilmar Abrego Garcia—the migrant wrongly deported to a Salvadorean supermax prison this month—as “a convicted MS-13 gang member.” This was flatly false; Abrego Garcia has never been charged with, let alone convicted of, a crime.

But asked about it at her press briefing later, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt doubled down.

“The vice president said he was a convicted member of MS-13,” a reporter asked her. “What evidence is there to back that up?”

“There’s a lot of evidence,” Leavitt replied. “And the Department of Homeland Security and ICE have that evidence, and I saw it this morning.”

Again: That this is a lie is a matter of public record. DHS and ICE are not sitting on secret records showing Abrego Garcia is a convict. If they were, they would release them. Instead, the public record is what his lawyers wrote in a filing this week, an assertion the government did not dispute in its response: “Abrego Garcia has never been arrested or charged with any crime in the U.S. or El Salvador.”

A few minutes later, a reporter asked Leavitt: “You said you’d seen evidence that this man was a convicted gang member. In what court was he convicted, and for what?”

“This individual was an MS-13 ringleader,” Leavitt said. “He is a leader in the brutal MS-13 gang, and he is involved in human trafficking, and now MS-13 is a designated foreign terrorist organization.” She threw in some stuff about “the insane failing Atlantic magazine” for flavor.

The administration has been rolling out this “human trafficking” line a lot since the Abrego Garcia story broke. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin repeatedly posted yesterday that “we have intelligence reports that he is involved in human trafficking.”

Unlike “convicted,” this could in theory be true.¹

But the government has been in court talking about Abrego Garcia a lot this week, and in that forum—where, unlike on social media and from the White House podium, you’re actually legally obliged to tell the truth—they haven’t alleged anything of the sort. And DHS has released no evidence whatsoever in support of that claim. I asked McLaughlin yesterday whether the agency had any plans to release that supposed evidence. She responded with a word-for-word repeat of her original tweet: “The individual in question is a member of the brutal MS-13 gang—we have intelligence reports that he is involved in human trafficking.”

This is becoming a pattern. Besides Abrego Garcia, the most controversial of the deportees to El Salvador has been Andry Hernandez, the gay makeup artist who was seemingly deported due to his “Mom” and “Dad” tattoos, which DHS flagged as linked to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Not so, said McLaughlin: “This man’s own social media indicates he is a member of Tren de Aragua.” But DHS hasn’t released any evidence to back that up, and when I emailed McLaughlin this week to ask to see that evidence, the department declined to comment.

I am not Facebook buds with Andry Hernandez. I have not peeped his Insta. His socials, for all I know, could be chockablock with the bloodthirstiest gang content imaginable. But the only data point we have saying there’s any there there is the good word of press flacks in an administration that will also claim straightfacedly that a guy who’s never been arrested has, in fact, been convicted of crimes. It ain’t worth much without the evidence. They’ve given us zilch.

There was a time when conservatives weren’t bending over backwards to trust the government when it spun them unsupported whoppers. Of course, there was a time when they weren’t cheering on the annihilation of due process, too. What a time to be alive!

Carney's Victoria visit sparks hope for political change among voters - Greater Victoria News

Carney's Victoria visit sparks hope for political change among voters - Greater Victoria News

Olivier Laurin
Apr 6, 2025 10:46 PM

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

PreviousNext

1 / 5 Liberal Leader Mark Carney waves to the crowd after his address during his first visit to B.C. at the Victoria Edelweiss Club in James Bay.(Bailey Seymour / Victoria News)

Expand

Listen to this article

00:03:16

Hundreds of attendees coiled around the 100 block of Niagara Street in James Bay, waiting under the rain to see Liberal Leader Mark Carney in his first visit to the province since the federal campaign was two weeks ago. 

Despite being a last-minute meet-and-greet, attendees eagerly shared their thoughts and support for the politician as they patiently waited to enter the Victoria Edelweiss Club on the evening of April 6.

A few dozen metres from the entrance, Greater Victoria resident Brian Simmons stood in line. Having “moved between parties” over the past few federal elections, Simmons said he plans to vote Liberal this time with Mark Carney at the helm. 

Greater Victoria resident Brian Simmons lends his support to Carney in the 2025 federal election. (Olivier Laurin / Victoria News)

Because of Carney’s extensive experience leading both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, along with his strong public presence, Simmons said these factors solidified his decision to support the Liberal Party.

“His interview on the Daily Show was particularly impressive,” he said. “He certainly stepped into the role of prime minister very smoothly."

“I think it's gonna be a good transition and energize the nation against Donald Trump.”

Simmons also believes Carney is the most qualified party leader to defend Canadians’ interests and guide the country through the next four years.

“Pierre Poilievre is uninspiring,” said Simmons. “He's never really worked outside of politics, and he's a typical conservative – he's all bluster and he doesn't have very good ideas. He would be just Trump 2.0.”

A few meters away, Carson Robinson and Megan Campbell echoed similar sentiments to Simmons. 

Carson Robinson and Megan Campbell believe Mark Carney is the best leader to guide Canada through the upcoming 4-year term. (Olivier Laurin / Victoria News)

As the two attendees slowly walked toward the venue, they said they were eager to see Carney’s true colours as the new leader of the Liberal Party, as he proposes a renewed political platform marking a shift from Trudeau’s nearly decade-long tenure – especially at a time of ongoing tariff wars with our southern neighbour.

“I'd like to know more about some radical shifts that we might accomplish to address our dependence on the U.S. economy,” said Campbell. “It's important to see if he's thinking about how to broaden our trade alliances so we're not so dependent on the US and also stimulate the Canadian economy. I think Carney is starting to show… strength and a lack of willingness to kiss the ring.”

Campbell argued that Carney’s leadership during Canada’s recovery from the 2008 financial crisis, as well as his role in guiding the U.K. through economic turmoil following Brexit, makes him the right choice to lead Canada.

Robinson added that it’s this very experience that could benefit the country.

“It's nice to have someone who has a non-political background and has more of a background in economics that can bring a more practical approach to running the government.” 

To read Victoria News' coverage of Carney's address, visit shorturl.at/OBOHb.

Skadden, Arps law firm will provide $100 million in pro bono legal services

 

Trump says Skadden, Arps law firm will provide $100 million in pro bono legal services

• President Donald Trump announced that the large law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom agreed to provide at least $100 million in pro bono legal services to the federal government during the Trump administration.
• The agreement, which Trump called “essentially a settlement,” allows Skadden, Arps to avoid becoming the sixth elite law firm to be targeted by an executive order from Trump imposing various punishments.
• Trump last week rescinded one of those executive orders after the targeted law firm Paul, Weiss, agreed to perform $40 million worth of pro bono — free — legal work for causes that the president supports.
• Three targeted law firms, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie have sued the Trump administration over the president’s executive orders targeting them.

Espionage rises as Trump and Musk fire thousands of federal workers

 

Concerns about espionage rise as Trump and Musk fire thousands of federal workers

Published Mon, Mar 24 202510:06 AM EDT

Share

A commuter near the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) headquarters in Washington, DC, US, on Wednesday, March 12, 2025. 

Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images

As President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk work to overhaul the federal government, they’re forcing out thousands of workers with insider knowledge and connections who now need a job.

For Russia, China and other adversaries, the upheaval in Washington as Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency guts government agencies presents an unprecedented opportunity to recruit informants, national security and intelligence experts say.

Every former federal worker with knowledge of or access to sensitive information or systems could be a target. When thousands of them leave their jobs at the same time, that creates a lot of targets, as well as a counterespionage challenge for the United States.

“This information is highly valuable, and it shouldn’t be surprising that Russia and China and other organizations — criminal syndicates for instance — would be aggressively recruiting government employees,” said Theresa Payton, a former White House chief information officer under President George W. Bush, who now runs her own cybersecurity firm.

 

Stand Up for the First Amendment

Judges must hold the line against Mad King Donald

Jennifer Rubin Mar 13

READ IN APP

No protection against authoritarian government is more important than the First Amendment. In the United States you can speak and associate with whomever you want, no matter how unpopular you, your associates, or your message might be. So when Donald Trump wields the heavy hand of government to seek retribution against his perceived enemies or those whom he simply dislikes, we should all be concerned.

Let’s consider the following hypothetical scenario:

A green card holder from Ukraine legally present in the United States engages in campus protests against Donald Trump’s sellout of Ukraine to the Russian dictator. Never arrested or charged with a crime, he is snatched up by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), spirited away to detention in another state, Louisiana (without notice to his pregnant wife or counsel), and threatened with deportation.

Here’s another version:

A green card holder from Canada legally present in the U.S. protests Trump’s mindbogglingly dumb tariff war. Never arrested or charged, he too is snatched up, sent to another state and threatened with deportation.

Outrageous, un-American, right? These cases are legally indistinguishable from the case of Mahmoud Khalil, who led anti-Israel protests at Columbia University, some of which went so far as to lionize Hamas. He was never arrested or charged. And yet because he advocated a position noxious to many Americans, his detention has been lauded by a purported civil rights group, the American Anti-Defamation League, and members of Congress have either cheered the action or were slow to object.

The ADL should know better. Surely, someone over there is familiar with Martin Niemöller’s famous poem:

First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

We still have a constitution, and due process still applies to those present in the country, including green card holders. Hence, an actual civil rights organization, the ACLU, put out a blistering statement in response to Khalil’s detention. “This arrest is unprecedented, illegal, and un-American. The federal government is claiming the authority to deport people with deep ties to the U.S. and revoke their green cards for advocating positions that the government opposes,” the ACLU said in a written statement. “To be clear: The First Amendment protects everyone in the U.S. The government’s actions are obviously intended to intimidate and chill speech on one side of a public debate.”

A protest against the detention of Mahmoud Khalil in Thomas Paine Park, NYC

The ACLU then signed onto a lawsuit brought by private attorneys. U.S. District Court Judge Jesse M. Furman in the Southern District of New York promptly issued an order to prevent the deportation from proceeding, and on Wednesday, at a hearing to order Khalil’s return to New York, the judge asked for a briefing to determine whether he must be returned to New York.

Trump’s blatant attempt to stoke the culture wars and to intimidate protestors in violation of the right to free speech cannot be allowed to stand. The First Amendment is essential to protect the freedom to criticize our government or its policies, especially when criticisms are unpopular. Popular speech needs little help, but when many consider the speaker or the message odious, the First Amendment becomes a bulwark against autocratic rule. If we countenance one protester’s deportation, any protester, whether a citizen or not, is at risk.

The First Amendment is also at issue in Trump’s efforts to exact revenge against law firms he dislikes. After targeting Covington & Burlington for its representation of Jack Smith, he went after Perkins & Coie for representing Hillary Clinton. But the latter was not in the mood to lay low or accept an attack on it or its clients.

Instead, Perkins & Coie hired a high-powered establishment law firm, Williams & Connolly, to sue the Justice Department, FCC, OMB, Office of Personnel Management, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and members of the Trump regime including Attorney General Pam Bondi, OMB director Russell Vought and DNI Tulis Gabbard. The suit challenged the executive order terminating contracts with the government, revoking all the firm attorneys’ security clearances, and barring its lawyers from federal buildings.

The suit alleges:

Because the Order in effect adjudicates and punishes alleged misconduct by Perkins Coie, it is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. Because it does so without notice and an opportunity to be heard, and because it punishes the entire firm for the purported misconduct of a handful of lawyers who are not employees of the firm, it is an unconstitutional violation of procedural due process and of the substantive due process right to practice one’s professional livelihood. Because the Order singles out Perkins Coie, it denies the firm the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Because the Order punishes the firm for the clients with which it has been associated and the legal positions it has taken on matters of election law, the Order constitutes retaliatory viewpoint discrimination and, therefore, violates the First Amendment rights of free expression and association, and right to petition the government for redress. Because the Order compels disclosure of confidential information revealing the firm’s relationships with its clients, it violates the First Amendment. Because the Order retaliates against Perkins Coie for its diversity-related speech, it violates the First Amendment. Because the Order is vague in proscribing what is prohibited “diversity, equity and inclusion,” it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Because the Order works to brand Perkins Coie as persona non grata and bar it from federal buildings, deny it the ability to communicate with federal employees, and terminate the government contracts of its clients, the Order violates the right to counsel afforded by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell on Wednesday granted Perkins’s request for a temporary restraining order enjoining key sections of the executive order. She noted, “This kind of a clear retaliation chills First Amendment.” Admonishing the government for “viewpoint discrimination” and lack of due process, she added, “I am sure that many in the legal profession are watching in horror at what Perkins Coie is going through here.”

In short, Judge Howell had no problem recognizing that such a blatant attack on the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments violates the fundamental rights that all Americans are entitled to enjoy. Frankly, an army of law firms should have risen up to defend Perkins. (Kudos to the fourteen Williams and Connolly lawyers who all signed their names to the civil complaint, demonstrating they will not be intimidated.)

Trump believes he is unconstrained by the Constitution or other laws. It is up to Americans, lawyers and judges to prove him wrong. Nothing less than the preservation of the American experiment in democracy is at issue.

Trump admin wants to change the GDP formula - GDP for Dummies

 

Trump admin wants to change the GDP formula

Chen Mengtong/Getty Images

Econ 101 professors might soon be handing students Sharpies to cross out the textbook truism that gross domestic product includes government spending, household consumption, net exports, and investment. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said this week that the statistical agencies he oversees might stop including government dollars spent in the measure of the economy’s size. Lutnick said the change would make reporting “transparent,” echoing Elon Musk’s earlier point that the government can juice on-paper economic performance through spending that doesn’t improve people’s lives. But economists say “useful spending” is subjective, and: Government spending, which makes up 17% of the US GDP, has implications for economic growth. The change could be largely cosmetic, as granular GDP statistics released by the government already allow economy watchers to subtract Uncle Sam’s bills. Some economists warn that the move threatens the independence of federal statistical agencies and could undermine trust in government data, especially if it’s perceived as an attempt to mask the impacts of Musk’s federal cost-cutting effort. Either way, the GDP isn’t looking so hot…with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta projecting this week that the economy will shrink by 2.8% in Q1. Harvard economist and former Obama advisor Jason Furman noted that GDP drop would be even bigger without government spending.

Columbia Concedes

 

Columbia Concedes

Columbia University has agreed to a series of demands from the Trump administration in an effort to restore $400M in funding that was revoked earlier this month. The administration had canceled federal grants and contracts over concerns that Columbia failed to adequately protect against antisemitism on campus.    The university's policy changes include banning identity-concealing masks during protests, hiring 36 campus security officers who can arrest or remove people, appointing a new senior vice provost to oversee the Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies department, and implementing a formal definition of antisemitism. It is unclear whether the changes are sufficient enough to reinstate federal funding.   The move has raised concerns about government interference in academic affairs and sets a precedent for other colleges and universities facing similar scrutiny, including Harvard, Stanford, and the University of Michigan. Last week, the Trump administration paused $175M in funding to the University of Pennsylvania for allowing a transgender woman to compete in women's sports.