It will be interesting to see what the Perry defense team does. If they really believe this is just politics, they will demand a preliminary hearing. Force the prosecution to come out from behind the secrecy of the grand jury and expose their evidence to public scrutiny.
BTW, since nobody else has come right out and said it, I will. This case involves a politico meddling with the agency that investigates ethics complaints against politicos and their financial supporters. Perry could have vetoed almost any other item in the state budget without raising such a red flag. IF it can be shown that he used the power of the Governor's office to interfere with the investigation and prosecution of a political supporter/ally, the charges are justified. None of us know whether the prosecution has evidence of that or not.
[TWEET]500634429367533568[/TWEET] I would question the source, but it is directly quoting Dershowitz here: http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/dershowitz-perry-indictment-outraged/2014/08/16/id/589179/ "This is another example of the criminalization of party differences," said Dershowitz, a prominent scholar on United States constitutional law and criminal law who writes the "Legally Speaking" column for Newsmax. "This idea of an indictment is an extremely dangerous trend in America, whether directed at [former House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay or [former President] Bill Clinton." Further, Dershowitz said, such indictments are something that's done in totalitarian countries and should not be done in the United States. In such countries, "if you don't like them, you indict," Dershowitz said. "In America, you vote against them...this should be up to the voters. There is no room in America for abuse of office charges, and this has to stop once and for all. This is a serious problem." And indicting a politician, rather than fighting back through a ballot box, "is so un-American." Dershowitz also told Newsmax Perry was well within his rights when he vetoed the money for Lehmberg's office, as he "saw a drunk serving as DA" who "shouldn't be enforcing criminal law." Dershowitz believes Perry will be acquitted, and the indictment will become an embarrassment to those involved. Perry is often named as a potential candidate for the GOP nomination in 2016, and has opted not to seek a fourth term as governor of Texas. Dershowitz said he hopes the legal charges are resolved long before the presidential election campaign cycle begins. "It's just ridiculous the extremes some prosecutors will go to," when they seek criminal charges in retribution for actions that they don't agree with politically," Dershowitz said.
What I find ironic is Dershowitz is saying this should be settled by voters. But Perry tried to do the exact same thing by forcing the District Attorney to resign when that should be left up to the voters. Perry actions against the DA was unprofessional and bullying in nature. If his conduct rises to the level of a crime or should be resolved by voters is an interesting question, but no matter what, I hope it is held against him if he decides to run for the republican nomination.
Baloney! Perry did exactly what a Governor should do, veto moneys being squandered on a useless function.
Perry's actions were professional and in the interest of the people and he was doing his job. He didn't force the District Attorney to resign. She's still DA. There's no law that says he should agree to fund them 100% of what they ask or infinite amount or $1. In Bob Filner's case here in SD, the city council voted on quite a few things to reduce the mayor's powers to the point he resigned. Nobody complained about them being unprofessional and bullying in nature.
I disagree. Perry is a bully and punk at best and maybe he is a criminal. I don't think you get the idea of coercion . . . just because someone doesn't do something doesn't mean it's not coercion.
This is one of those cases where if it were a democrat governor the ones complaining the loudest in here would be cheering instead.
In politics, there is usually two sides to every story: Rick Perry, Texas’ longstanding Republican governor and a 2012 presidential candidate, is now under indictment. The indictment lays out two counts against the Texas governor, one for “Abuse of Official Capacity” and the other for “Coercion of Public Servant.” As the Texas Observer explains, this indictment arises out of a dispute over who will hold one of the few Texas offices with statewide power that is still controlled by a Democrat. Rosemary Lehmberg is that Democrat, and she is the District Attorney for Travis County, Texas. Because Travis County includes Austin, the state capital, her office controls a Public Integrity Unit that investigates alleged ethical breaches by state-level politicians. Among other things, that unit investigated the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, which is accused of improperly distributing grant money — including some grant money that was given to people with close ties to Governor Perry.
Two points: 1) She was arrested for DUI and served jail time. She's the criminal. 2) The funding would have gone through if she resigned and that unit would have been able to investigate whatever they chose. The drunk driver deserved to be bullied out of office.
Two points: 1) Many elected officials have been convicted of DUII (including former president). 2) Perry would have been able to replace democrat DA with republican DA, so of course he would have improved funding for his guy. Governor should not bully democrat out of office, that is an issue for the voters.
A criminal, but not the criminal. There are plenty of others. Why? Did the drunk driving occur during working hours? Did it affect her job performance? What is the connection between her job and her arrest? If she'd been arrested for smoking pot, would you feel the same way? Jaywalking? Hiring a prostitute? Not paying her taxes? Abuse of power? Coercion? For which crimes does one deserve to be bullied out of office in DennyLand? Obviously not the last two... barfo
Well I am not sure how you developed the opinion. I don't know about Texas but it sure is hard to find a case where a Democrat governor in Oregon vetoed a spending bill. http://www.oregon.gov/gov/media_room/Pages/bills_signed/bills.aspx
THE criminal of the two people involved here. Actually, the special prosecutor isn't so clean himself. http://weaselzippers.us/196645-spec...y-has-been-accused-of-misconduct-in-the-past/ The drunk driving occurred while she was in charge of this ethic unit. She was caught on video trying to coerce the officers into letting her off, using her authority as DA. You'd think the head of an ethics unit might need to be, you know, ethical. But your kind is fine with the likes of this guy and corruption is OK.