The American politician at the center of a bold attempt to help Donald Trump become president should not have in mind the future position of the commander.
According to a wild theory, he will apologize to the president following allegations of bribery.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton yesterday announced his intention to sue Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. In the US Supreme Court. Joe Biden It won all four states in the November election.
“Paxton’s case will not defeat the election,” the website wrote Stone slab. “But it may succeed in getting him out of federal prison.”
Mr Paxton declined to speak to the White House about an apology. But the White House has taken note of his court case.
In his case, Mr Paxton argued that changes in key voting procedures to expand mail-in voting were illegal. It calls for electoral college voters in four states to be elected by Republican legislatures rather than by election results.
Many allegations have arisen from this Trump Camp but there is no evidence of widespread fraud in the US election. Many court cases in this case have failed to gain any traction.
It is noteworthy that the Texas case came from Mr Paxton, not the state’s attorney general, Kyle Hawkins, who would have usually defended state lawsuits.
There is a lot Speculation that Mr Hawkins is trying to exclude himself from a case It is named by some “Dumbest” and “Crazyst” They have seen a number of different legal avenues that Trump tried to use to thwart the election result.
However, a suggestion has emerged as to why Mr Paxton might be interested in bringing the case to the fore – in favor of Mr Trump, in the hope that he will be pardoned when the president finally resigns.
Mr Paxton is reportedly under investigation by the FBI following allegations of bribery and office abuse.
The Associated Press It was reported in November that Mr Paxton had used his office to benefit a wealthy donor.
“Paxton (a real estate developer) has been accused of exploiting the position of Texas’ top law enforcement officer in a number of ways, according to seven senior attorneys in the Attorney General’s Office and the agency’s law enforcement chief.
Many employees have said they have to leave their posts after raising their concerns.
Full details of the allegations have not been released.
Mr Paxton said the allegations from former employees were “very bad in terms of speculation and misrepresent the facts on a large scale.” He has denied any wrongdoing.
Talks to the news agency Reuters, Jonathan Adler, a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Ohio, said the case was a way for Mr Paxton to draw the president’s attention and cover up the allegations.
“It is very clear that one way for you to be pardoned is to march to the President’s defense,” Mr Adler said.
Mr Trump is undoubtedly pleased with the Texas case. He said in a tweet on Thursday “This is huge. Our country needs a victory. ”
Texas Television Station NBC-KXAN Mr Paxton announced that he had been pushed back against the doctrine.
“I’m not discussing anything … anything like that,” Mr Paxton said.
U.S. presidents can grant full pardon or mercy to any person convicted or punished with federal crimes.
So far, Mr Trump has issued 29 apologies. These include pro-Trump commentators and supporters as well as friends and colleagues. Many Republican Party Politicians and lawyers are one of them.
Late last month, He apologized to his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn He pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.
Since the pardon, Mr Flynn has argued that some form of martial law should be imposed and that the constitution should be suspended in order to hold re-election.
Mr Trump is still far behind the 212 apologies used by former President Barack Obama during his two terms.
Try to beat the votes
Most legal minds see Mr. Paxton’s case as a long one. Initially, it aimed to go straight to the Supreme Court, which sits several judges nominated by Mr Trump, with the exception of the lower courts.
Usually cases have to be heard by the lower court before going to the Supreme Court. That’s what Texas is doing if one state sues another state. But the court does not have to accept this argument and can dismiss the case.
If successful, Mr Paxton wants the Supreme Court to order the four states that show Mr Biden’s victory to boycott their popular vote, instead electing their voters through their respective state legislatures.
All of these state legislatures are controlled by Republicans, so in theory pro-Trump loyalists can be elected.
Mr Paxton said “confidence in the integrity of our electoral process is sacred.”
“Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election.
“States violated laws enacted by duly elected legislatures, thus violating the Constitution.
“By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tarnished the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but also tainted Texas and every state that has held legitimate elections, ”he said.
“Their failure to abide by the rules of the law casts a dark shadow of suspicion over the outcome of the entire election. We are now asking the Supreme Court to take action to rectify his gross error.”
But legal experts are skeptical of how successful the Texas case will be.
Professor Rick Hassan, an election legal expert at the Irvine School of Law, described Mr Paxton’s case as “the worst case I have ever seen filed in the Supreme Court on an urgent basis”, “wearing a mask as a case” and “complete rubbish”.
Steve Vladtek, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, called it “crazy”, “offensive” and “in vain.”
“We seem to have a new leader in the frenzied case filed to challenge the election,” he said, describing Mr Paxton’s arguments as “absolute and undeniable nonsense”.