So, Louis Gohmert thinks we should let the DOJ intimidate our Attorney General into not running for a third term. I find that VERY disappointing personally.

Having said that, I think Texas will be in good hands with either Paxton or Gohmert. (I'll be voting for Paxton. I'm not in the habit of firing people for doing a good job.)

Quote: EdJames wrote in post #3

---

Haven't had a chance to listen to the interviews yet, hoping to do so later... does Gohmert bring that aspect up?

---

My view is that Paxton must be over the target just based on the amount of flak he's taking.

Quote: EdJames wrote in post #7

---

@Tinker

OK, I got to listen to the Gohmert interview, will get to the Paxton interview later.

My impressions:

- It was good to hear Gohmert come out in public and say what he did about the jeopardy of having the Republican candidate for AG (after the primary) come under Federal indictment. Previously, we had, by word of mouth, heard from others that Louie was saying this about Paxton's situation. This is the first time that we got to hear him say it out loud.

- Now, it is a given that there is nothing that Gohmert, nor anyone else in the State of Texas, can do, if the corrupt Federal DoJ wants to bring an indictment against Paxton. (Guilty or innocent, no one can stop Garland from indicting Paxton, if that is their plan. And of course, it will come after Paxton wins the primary and becomes the GOP candidate.)

- It seems to me that Gohmert is making a judgement call -- it is his judgement that the indictment (post primary) is coming. And that he doesn't believe that the other two GOP candidates (GP Bush and Eva Guzman) have any chance to beat Paxton in the primary (or whether either would make a good Texas AG). So, in his judgement, it is better for him to make a primary run and remove Paxton from the equation. (I must say that Gohmert isn't brimming with confidence about his own chances, based on that interview.)

- Many of you know Gohmert much better and longer than I. To me, he always appeared to be a straight-shooter.... with good judgement. However, he is a politician... I honestly can't tell if he is truly and solely motivated by concern that the indictment is coming (), and that the GOP will be left with an AG candidate on the ballot, that is under Federal indictment. (And apparently, he can't be removed from the ballot because of that.)

- Aside from the above, I thought that Gohmert made some good points on how he (had he been the AG for the past couple of years) would have done things differently... on a number of topics... all in the vein of telling Abbott that he better toe the line Constitutionally (or be sued by the AG), rather than just rubber stamping everything that Abbott wanted to do...

- I think that every Texas voter should listen to these interviews.... food for thought...


Also, I must confess that I do not know much about these charges being levied against Paxton... does anyone have a good link to read about the topic? (Something as 'neutral' or unbiased as possible.) We all ought to understand the ins and outs of this situation, for we may find our selves having to consider voting for a candidate under Federal indictment.... and for what it's worth, I am not convinced that an indicted Paxton would lose to the Democrat, based on looking at their primary field:



https://ballotpedia.org/Texas_Attorney_General_election,_2022


@mimi2020 @Isailedaway @Sanguine @Dave Smith @Amontillado @Energizer Bunny @Sparrow @ranchhand @austingirl

---

Many years ago now (back in the days of Free Republic's ascendency) I wrote a piece about the central theme of James Madison's words in Federalist #47

Quote

---

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny..

---

having come to pass and the only group capable of bringing it about (lawyers) having succeeded

The piece was widely lauded at the time by some of the very distinguished people who populated that website at the time (names you would recognize if you heard them). I can't find it now.

Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #11

---

I'd like to read it if you find it, @Tinker .

---

Quote

---

James Madison, author of the US Constitution, wrote:

"No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value or is stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty than that ... the accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

To avoid the "same hands" accumulation of power, the Constitution incorporated a system of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances". This system created three separate branches of government. The Legislative (Congress), which makes the laws, the Judiciary (the Courts), which interprets the laws and the Executive (the Presidency), which enforces the laws. By separating the powers of government in this manner it was intended that each branch would serve as a "check" and "balance" to the powers of the other two. This was done in order to make certain that the government would never possess sufficient power to oppress the people.

Our government currently looks like this:

• The Judicial branch is, of necessity, composed of 100% lawyers
• The executive office is currently held by a lawyer
• And the within the 535 legislative seats of the U. S. Congress there are more lawyers than all other professions combined

I would submit that Mr. Madison’s greatest fear has been realized despite his best effort (Via the Constitution) to prevent it. Lawyer/judges now make the laws, interpret the laws and enforce the laws and have effectively turned our Constitutional Republic into a Juristocracy, thus defeating the spirit, intent and purpose of the Constitution.

Please understand that I hold the legal profession in very high regard and have no personal animosity toward either individual members or the profession in general. In fact, I believe that I am lucky enough to be able to count a number of the members of this honored profession as friends (at least until they read this!). That not withstanding, I will assure you that, because of my knowledge of the above, I would oppose any one of them vigorously, regardless of political party affiliation, should they EVER decide to run for elective office outside the Judicial branch of government.

My hope is that those of you reading this, and thus now aware of the problem, will remember it the next time you are called upon to make choices in the election booth as well.

---

@EdJames Thanks so much for the videos of the AG candidates and synopsis.

I intend to vote for Louie as AG as he is a tried and true conservative without question who has the unique attribute of being in the judge's seat during his career, a perspective that as AG will serve him well. He is a politician, but I know him well and personally and even goes to church with me. He is an unqualified patriot of this country and the Constitution and could teach history in ay university in this country in a truthful manner.

I wonder is any of you could direct me to candidate recommendations for all Texas statewide and congressional offices or be will to willing to even offer up your own recommendations as the early voting begins next week. I am having difficulty in finding much in the way of this at this time.

@Tinker I particularly respect your judgement on these matters.

Quote: Isailedaway wrote in post #14

---

@EdJames Thanks so much for the videos of the AG candidates and synopsis.

I intend to vote for Louie as AG as he is a tried and true conservative without question who has the unique attribute of being in the judge's seat during his career, a perspective that as AG will serve him well. He is a politician, but I know him well and personally and even goes to church with me. He is an unqualified patriot of this country and the Constitution and could teach history in ay university in this country in a truthful manner.

I wonder is any of you could direct me to candidate recommendations for all Texas statewide and congressional offices or be will to willing to even offer up your own recommendations as the early voting begins next week. I am having difficulty in finding much in the way of this at this time.

@Tinker I particularly respect your judgement on these matters.

---