unable to do it on the highway the drunk driver is now trying to drive Texas off into a ditch
hopefully Texas will cancel her work permit
“If she had done the right thing and resigned, none of this would have ever happened.”
Trying to get a liberal to do the right thing is like trying to teach a pig to sing — It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig.
Drunky, the wonder DA.
A stumbling and staggering Lehmberg told the officers she wasn’t able to properly walk the line “because it hurts.” Several times she begins attempting to walk the straight line disregarding the officer’s instructions. After finally allowing the officer to demonstrate his instructions (to put one foot in front of another) without being interrupted, she admits, “I can’t do that.”When attempting to stand on one leg, the crocked DA almost fell over again, telling the officer,
After Lehmberg tells the officer, “I can’t do that,” the officer explains that because of the fact that she failed the sobriety tests, and because of her “erratic driving,” which included her driving in the bike lane (thank God a bicyclist wasn’t in it), “going southbound in a northbound lane of traffic” it left him no choice but to arrest her. She was then handcuffed.
The drunken wench clawed and Spit at Officers During Arrest..
I’ve never been a big fan of Gov. Perry, but we all certainly need to circle the wagons around him in this instance.
One interesting thing about this case. In general, even in the “political” cases, there is some activity which was done in relative secrecy. For example, Tom DeLay was likely moving money in a way that hid it from some view — legally, it turned out, but it wasn’t public knowledge until they prosecuted it. The same is true in most of the cases, there’s e-mails that come to light.
Like with the bridgegate in New jersey, where at first there was nothing, then they found that some underlings might have done something, and now the question is whether the Governor knew.
Or with the Walker case, where there does appear to be something illegal someone did, but more importantly for this discussion it was something hidden from view, and then revealed.
In those cases, the mere act of hiding things makes it look like there might be a reason it was hidden, which lends credence to the charges.
In the Perry case, absolutely NOTHING was hidden. Perry just came out openly and did something every Governor does — said he would veto spending. His reasons were stated publicly — to have the convicted head resign. There were no e-mails detailing some secret purpose, or some kickback, or anything not know.
Perry then vetoed the money, publicly.
So the question becomes — why would someone publicly commit a crime, without trying to hide it. Clearly Perry had no expectation that this was a crime. And clearly, NOBODY ELSE did either, because it was well after the initial threat, and after the Veto, that a left-wing organization came up with the novel legal theory that this could be a legal violation.
When nobody who knows what you did thinks it is a crime until someone concocts a bizarre argument for it, there is little reason to actually prosecute. Clearly nobody was trying to commit a crime, or to act in a way that they thought was criminal.
At worst, this would have ended up with a finding and a warning for future Governors to take care. The idea that a prosecutor wants to PUNISH Perry for doing something NOBODY knew was a crime, is ludicrous, and everybody who fears being arrested for doing something they think is legal knows it.
Sort of like Illegal alien communist Muslim voted President of the US
I find their charges entirely hypocritical since this is exactly what they are attempting to do to Gov. Perry.