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 ...
Darn.
I can’t find the post where someone said that.
BTW- Who appoints the Grand Jury? I bet they did stack it this time. Politics is everything to the left.
They are planning strategy. Even in this little town the Democrat HQ has cars in the parking lot today, on a Sunday
“He did not threaten her. He threatened the unit’s budget as is his right.”
I guess that’s why he’s under indictment, for not abusing the power of his office.
I get that it has a lot of Freepers outraged.
I’ve also read the post where it just seems like common sense that what he did was perfectly ok.
But federal law or any law for that matter very rarely follows the line of common sense.
You can explain it away however you want. She was a drunk. She was abusive to the cops. The bottom line is that a Republican judge in San Antonio appointed a Republican special prosecutor who convened a grand jury who then indicted him.
I’m sure it didn’t help his case that he was under investigation by the PIU.
That does cloud the issue a little more don’t you think?
Ever hear of Tom "The Hammer" DeLay? House Rep from TX who got things done was embroiled in an indictment by an Austin prosecutor which went on 4 years before DeLay was cleared. By then his political life was over and his pocket book was about empty.
Then there were false accusations about Kay Bailey Hutchinson which came to nothing.
I think when these political indictments come to nothing, the prosecutor ought to have to reimburse the defendant for the court costs, plus damage compensation.
vaudine
The guy is a lawyer, right?
What do you call 200 dead lawyers at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean?
I've read in Texas that a court picks grand jury commissioners who then pick the jury members.
In Travis County Tx, that would be Moonbat after Moonbat on the jury.
Yo ho ho? x200?
bump
I guess he’s under indictment for some reason is like saying I guess Hitler invaded France for some reason. Actually he had a lot of reasons. none of them valid.
I’m pretty old. Never heard of a governor being indicted for threatening a veto. How about you?
There are 50 states, 50 governors. Think in our history lots of them have threatened lots of vetoes for lots of reasons?
I guess Perry is that one evil criminal governor. Glad Mr. McCrum caught him for the evil use of his Constitutional veto power.
And McCrum comes out and dead pans his press conference as if hey, no big deal, criminalizing the veto power is right there in statute. Except it isn’t.
I would bet you most governors, most politicians, “threaten” in this way most days.
That is a very good point. But here's why I think Perry's veto could set a dangerous president.
Like the other states, Wisconsin receives federal money (for education, roads, etc.) Now let's suppose Gov. Walker did something that really upset Obama.
Suppose Obama then said: I will veto any bill containing federal money for Wisconsin as long as Walker is governor.
Certainly this situation would not be identical to the Texas case. But wouldn't we conservatives be enraged?
Delay was first convicted. He then appealed that to the 3rd Court of Appeals who overturned the conviction. Lehmberg then appealed the 3rd Courts decision to the State Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the highest criminal court in Texas. That court agreed to hear the case last May.
That is why Perry wanted Lehmberg to resign. If she had resigned, Perry could have appointed her replacement and he would have appointed someone that would squash the Delay prosecution before it would be heard by the State Court of Criminal Appeals.
A. When a rooster wakes up in the morning, its primal urge is to cluck defiance"
Kindly see my post #70. And freeandfreezing, think you for the link. But unfortunately it contains too much legalese for me to follow.
“I guess he’s under indictment for some reason is like saying I guess Hitler invaded France for some reason. Actually he had a lot of reasons. none of them valid.
I’m pretty old. Never heard of a governor being indicted for threatening a veto. How about you?
There are 50 states, 50 governors. Think in our history lots of them have threatened lots of vetoes for lots of reasons?
I guess Perry is that one evil criminal governor. Glad Mr. McCrum caught him for the evil use of his Constitutional veto power.
And McCrum comes out and dead pans his press conference as if hey, no big deal, criminalizing the veto power is right there in statute. Except it isn’t.
I would bet you most governors, most politicians, “threaten” in this way most days.”
Here. This clip is from the SA Xpress News
I guess he’s under indictment for some reason is like saying I guess Hitler invaded France for some reason. Actually he had a lot of reasons. none of them valid.
I’m pretty old. Never heard of a governor being indicted for threatening a veto. How about you?
There are 50 states, 50 governors. Think in our history lots of them have threatened lots of vetoes for lots of reasons?
I guess Perry is that one evil criminal governor. Glad Mr. McCrum caught him for the evil use of his Constitutional veto power.
And McCrum comes out and dead pans his press conference as if hey, no big deal, criminalizing the veto power is right there in statute. Except it isn’t.
I would bet you most governors, most politicians, “threaten” in this way most days.
San Antonio Express News // Nolan Hicks
AUSTIN — Aides to Gov. Rick Perry offered beleaguered Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg continued employment in her office if she resigned her elected post after a drunken-driving arrest, officials familiar with the offer said Thursday.
The offer came after Perry threatened and then vetoed $7.5 million in funding last June for the district attorney’s anti-corruption unit, known as the Public Integrity Unit, because Lehmberg refused to step down.
Several officials told the San Antonio Express-News that Perry — through intermediaries — offered various options to Lehmberg to entice her resignation, culminating in promises to restore funding to the unit, another position for her in the district attorney’s office and the selection of her top lieutenant to serve as the new district attorney.
A Travis County grand jury has been convened to look into allegations of wrongdoing. The governor’s office contends that Perry was in his constitutional right in trying to remove Lehmberg from office after she was accused of a crime.
Travis County Commissioner Gerald Daughtery, a Republican, said he reached out to Perry’s office after the veto to see if there was some way to restore state funding for the Public Integrity Unit. He said negotiations eventually included allowing Democrats, who dominate Travis County politics, to essentially pick Lehmberg’s replacement.
“There was this massive amount of fear that if Rosemary steps down, it’s the governor who gets to appoint someone,” Daughtery said.
He said a Lehmberg aide was floated as a potential replacement to make it palatable to Democrats.
Travis County Judge Sam Biscoe confirmed that Perry’s office had said Lehmberg would be replaced with another Democrat who was currently working in the district attorney’s office.
“Then the offer was made, I was told, that the governor would appoint a Democrat, and preferably one already working in the DA’s office,” Briscoe said.
Biscoe added that he had never directly communicated with Perry or his staff during the talks.
The proposed replacement was First Assistant District Attorney John Neal, according to a former public official and an elected official with knowledge of the proposals who spoke on background to candidly discuss the offers.
In late July, the offer was sweetened again, the unnamed officials said, when the governor’s office indicated that Lehmberg would be allowed to remain in her office in another capacity if she resigned her elected position.
The offer was explicit; “they were clear,” the elected official said.
Lehmberg, whose term ends in 2016, said she would not seek re-election.
The grand jury is expected to meet Friday. It was convened to look into allegations that Perry, the state’s longest-serving governor, broke the law by threatening to veto the Public Integrity Unit funding to force Lehmberg to step down.
A special prosecutor, San Antonio attorney Michael McCrum, was named to investigate.
McCrum said recently that he did not know if there was wrongdoing on Perry’s part but that he was “concerned about different aspects of how all this happened, and that includes the governor’s actions.”
Rudy Magallanes, a spokesman for the district attorney’s office, said Lehmberg had no comment on the matter.
The governor’s office did not respond to several phone calls seeking comment. But the office has defended Perry’s actions as a constitutional use of his veto authority.
In a statement explaining his veto last year, Perry said he axed the money because Lehmberg was unfit to remain in office.
“Despite the otherwise good work (of) the Public Integrity Unit’s employees, I cannot in good conscience support continued state funding for an office with statewide jurisdiction at a time when the person charged with ultimate responsibility of that unit has lost the public’s confidence.”
Government watchdog group Texans for Public Justice called the veto threat coercion and potential bribery in complaints filed with the district attorney’s office and the Travis County attorney.
The veto threat came as the anti-corruption unit was investigating the scandal-plagued Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. Its creation was championed by Perry. The investigation encompassed a variety of matters, including improperly awarding $11 million to Dallas-based biotechnology company Peloton Therapeutics.
The district attorney’s office closed the investigation into the cancer-fighting agency in December after Jerry Cobbs, a former high-ranking official there, was indicted. Cobbs is accused of misleading other top officials about Peloton’s grant by failing to tell them that it did not undergo required reviews.
Prosecutors said at the time that Perry’s decision to veto the unit’s funding had slowed the investigation.
Meanwhile, the Texas Tribune first reported Tuesday that Perry’s office offered to restore the funding after the veto in exchange for Lehmberg’s resignation.
Since then, officials have painted a scenario in which several offers were proposed by the governor’s office.
Judge Biscoe said discussions were centered on removing Lehmberg from office, with little concern about other jobs she could do in the office.
Perry’s veto came two months after Lehmberg’s arrest for drunken driving in April 2013. She later pleaded guilty.
Video of her arrest and subsequent booking into Travis County Jail, which showed a visibly intoxicated Lehmberg berating law enforcement officers, became a viral sensation on the Internet.
And the Moonbat Grand jury indictment here.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2014/08/15/indictment-against-texas-gov-rick-perry/
A good start.
The prosecutor is not a Republican.
(c) It is an exception to the application of [coercion] 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.
In exercising the veto, which is an official action, Perry has immunity from the statute, however coercion may be defined therein. Stop digging. You've lost.
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.