Texas' Perry indicted for coercion for veto threat

[thraashman]

Do better. Tie it to the recognition of gay marriage.

Texashiker is already on a roll with the stupid things he's saying, lets not bring up his favorite topic to say fucktarded things about. I'm not sure I could stomach that much stupid occurring at one time.

 

[JEDI]

So for all of you who don't think what Perry did was an illegal use of power and blackmail, what if a hurricane his Louisiana and Obama told Bobby Jindal that he wouldn't declare it a disaster thus withholding federal disaster relief funds unless Jindal agreed to form a state Obamacare exchange? Because it would be the same damned thing.

nope.
not even close to what rick 'mr abuse' perry did

 

[Mandres]

One facet the local news has been hinting at is that this particular anti-corruption unit had/has been investigating a company that Perry used to sell influence. The insinuation is that he wanted her gone, and consequently to install his own appointment, in order to cover his and his buddy's asses regarding the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT).

It's very unusual for a grand jury to pursue charges like that. It'll be interesting to see what comes all comes out at trial. Living in TX you hear whispers all the time about how corrupt Perry's good ole' boy operation is.

 

[DominionSeraph]

The legislature can make exactly zero constraints on how the executive chooses to use its veto powers for. Not almost zero: zero. Again, even in the case of bribery the veto itself would not be illegal, the taking of money would be illegal.

Ah, yes, I see your point. If it can't address the use, it can't define a misuse. The $7.5 million angle was always stupid, as he wielded the value of his veto, not $7.5 million, as the $7.5 million budget has no existence until it's law; but yes, additionally, if it cannot address his wielding of his veto, it can't declare a use to be an abuse.
Though if it can address what he receives, then what we have is the soliciting a bribe:

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.36.htm
Sec. 36.02. BRIBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly offers, confers, or agrees to confer on another, or solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from another:
(1) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter;

Soliciting her resignation in exchange for his exercise of his signing discretion is soliciting a bribe.

 

[werepossum]

So for all of you who don't think what Perry did was an illegal use of power and blackmail, what if a hurricane his Louisiana and Obama told Bobby Jindal that he wouldn't declare it a disaster thus withholding federal disaster relief funds unless Jindal agreed to form a state Obamacare exchange? Because it would be the same damned thing.

Unless there's some mandatory disaster law of which I'm unfamiliar, that would be entirely within Obama's discretion. That exact issue has been raised many times on both sides of the table as a President declares one county a disaster area, bringing in federal money, while for another adjacent county equally hard hit he refuses to make that declaration. The accusation (itself usually a political statement) is that the President made his decision on the basis of politics.

 

[fskimospy]

Ah, yes, I see your point. If it can't address the use, it can't define a misuse. The $7.5 million angle was always stupid, as he wielded the value of his veto, not $7.5 million, as the $7.5 million budget has no existence until it's law; but yes, additionally, if it cannot address his wielding of his veto, it can't declare a use to be an abuse.
Though if it can address what he receives, then what we have is the soliciting a bribe:

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.36.htm
Sec. 36.02. BRIBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly offers, confers, or agrees to confer on another, or solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from another:
(1) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter;

Soliciting her resignation in exchange for his exercise of his signing discretion is soliciting a bribe.

Having someone resign is not a bribe by any standard I have ever heard. Moreover, bribery is not one of the crimes he was indicted on.

 

[Jhhnn]

Lehmberg should have resigned. Since she did not resign, funding should have been cut.

if anyone is holding hostages here, it is her.

That excuses Perry's actions not in the slightest. The performance & purpose of the anti-corruption unit was never in question. Perry knowingly threatened & damaged the functioning of the State he is sworn to support purely as an act of political revenge.

Viewed straight-on, that's naked abuse of power.

Lehmberg really holds the moral high ground here. She acknowledged her wrong, put herself at the mercy of the legal system entirely. She has been entirely compliant. That system allowed to keep her elected position. That should have been the end of it.

Whether the charges against Perry stick or not, the whole episode shows that he's arrogant, stupid & not fit to lead.

 

[zinfamous]

Whatever happens, I hope they can keep his hair out of prison.

:wub:

 

[DominionSeraph]

Having someone resign is not a bribe by any standard I have ever heard.

So you've never heard of the very definition of bribery?
Saying his signature was for sale for her job is no different than saying it was for sale for money.

Moreover, bribery is not one of the crimes he was indicted on.

Hopefully that changes. I think I'll shoot off an email to a certain DA.

 

[schmuckley]

Next up: Indicters indicted for abuse of legal system for political purposes.

 

[fskimospy]

So you've never heard of the very definition of bribery?
Saying his signature was for sale for her job is no different than saying it was for sale for money.

You misunderstand me, I was trying to find a nice way to tell you that you don't know what bribery is. Your definition is basically attempting to criminalize deal making in government. Apply it to legislation, etc, and see how ridiculous it is.

Hopefully that changes. I think I'll shoot off an email to a certain DA.

I encourage you to do so. I'll give you a wager at very favorable odds that they ignore you.

 

[Jhhnn]

You misunderstand me, I was trying to find a nice way to tell you that you don't know what bribery is. Your definition is basically attempting to criminalize deal making in government. Apply it to legislation, etc, and see how ridiculous it is.



I encourage you to do so. I'll give you a wager at very favorable odds that they ignore you.

You're right, i think, in saying it's not bribery. It's extortion.

 

[MongGrel]

What is up with all these Rick guys in the South to begin with.

Rick Scott should have had his head on pole 4 years ago, but we still have idgits in the boonies voting.

That and the current jermandering thing has went through the court, but it's too late supposedly to do about it with the current elections. *cough BULLSHIT*

That's have the problem, people seem to think the fucking things than can do today have no effect.

 

[fskimospy]

You're right, i think, in saying it's not bribery. It's extortion.

So when Obama says he will veto a bill unless a provision he wants is added to it, is he committing extortion?

 

[MongGrel]

Go go Skeletor.

What a dick he's made a living out of fucking people.

Yeah that would be a good President.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=7AD6B6DFAA0BE68DFED87AD6B6DFAA0BE68DFED8

The fact that Jeb has shown up again and he said was considering running again even when a few years ago he said he never would makes me more worried.

Would be more a rape.

And I've actually met Jeb, but he shouldn't have control of shit.

 

[MongGrel]

People should start reading forums and actually making real life decisions is all I can say.

 

[Jaskalas]

NYTIMES: Pursuit of Rick Perry 'overzealous prosecution'...

 

[TerryMathews]

Soliciting her resignation in exchange for his exercise of his signing discretion is soliciting a bribe.

Stupid is as stupid does.

JSYK, your definition makes every plea bargain ever bribery.

 

[Atreus21]

The legislature can make exactly zero constraints on how the executive chooses to use its veto powers for. Not almost zero: zero. Again, even in the case of bribery the veto itself would not be illegal, the taking of money would be illegal.

Any attempt to attach any conditions to how the governor uses his veto power is flatly unconstitutional.



This was definitely the more baffling of the two indictments. Not only is it perfectly legal to leverage the political process to oust people you don't like, but the $7.5 million was never under his control because it was never appropriated.

There are times when I wonder about you, eskimo.

 

[Jhhnn]

So when Obama says he will veto a bill unless a provision he wants is added to it, is he committing extortion?

Nice straw man. Really. So cute, so life-like.

If he threatened to deny federal funds to Ohio because Boehner wouldn't resign, that would be extortion. If he carried out that threat, it would be abuse of power.

Apples to apples, please.

 

[fskimospy]

There are times when I wonder about you, eskimo.

What do you wonder?

 

[fskimospy]

Nice straw man. Really. So cute, so life-like.

If he threatened to deny federal funds to Ohio because Boehner wouldn't resign, that would be extortion. If he carried out that threat, it would be abuse of power.

Apples to apples, please.

Just so we're clear, demanding job changes is extortion but demanding legislation changes isn't? What is the basis for this distinction?

 

[Jhhnn]

Just so we're clear, demanding job changes is extortion but demanding legislation changes isn't? What is the basis for this distinction?

Both Lehmberg & Boehner are elected officials. Perry has no right to tie Lehmberg's resignation to funding, nor does Obama have the right to do the same wrt Boehner.

Following your line of reasoning, if Perry demanded & failed to obtain the resignation of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, an elective position, he would then have every right to de-fund that Court.

Think it through.

 

[fskimospy]

Both Lehmberg & Boehner are elected officials. Perry has no right to tie Lehmberg's resignation to funding, nor does Obama have the right to do the same wrt Boehner.

Why not? Extortion is a crime with a very specific definition, one that doesn't depend on whether or not it is a personnel or a legislative condition being placed. So again, what's the basis for this distinction?

Following your line of reasoning, if Perry demanded & failed to obtain the resignation of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, an elective position, he would then have every right to de-fund that Court.

Think it through.

Yes, he could de-fund the court. Depending on how the Texas Constitution is written the abolition of the Texas Supreme Court through defunding might be unconstitutional, but that's an entirely different issue than a criminal charge of abusing power.

If Perry were to attempt to do that he would have to face the political consequences of attacking the Supreme Court, but I'm unaware of any legal consequences to him.

 

[DominionSeraph]

So when Obama says he will veto a bill unless a provision he wants is added to it, is he committing extortion?

That's relating to the content of the bill. A DA is not a lawmaker. She does not have the power to change the bill. He asked her to add the gravy of her resignation to it before he would consider it. That's soliciting a bribe and coercing a public servant.