Changes

==Reactions==

==Reactions==

The impeachment of Paxton has resulted in a split between Texas Republicans.  Both sides within the Republican Party of Texas recognize that Paxton's actions and lawsuits against [[Biden Administration]] officials and Federal agencies, claiming overreach into state matters, have had a fair level of success in the courts, and are beneficial to overarching Republican goals of keeping the state politically conservative and desirable as a relocation destination for businesses and individuals (and, as a side benefit, maintaining Republican control over state politics, which the Republicans have managed to accomplish for nearly two decades).  Both sides also recognize, though, that Paxton has had long-standing legal and other issues involving very serious matters.

The impeachment of Paxton has resulted in a split between Texas Republicans.  Both sides within the Republican Party of Texas recognize that Paxton's actions and lawsuits against [[Biden Administration]] officials and Federal agencies, claiming overreach into state matters, have had a fair level of success in the courts, and are beneficial to overarching Republican goals of keeping the state politically conservative and desirable as a relocation destination for businesses and individuals (and, as a side benefit, maintaining Republican control over state politics, which the Republicans have managed to accomplish for nearly two decades).  Both sides also recognize, though, that Paxton has had long-standing legal and other issues involving very serious matters.

*One side believes that notwithstanding Paxton's efforts and success against Federal overreach, his outside legal issues are a '''''distraction''''' to the Republican Party of Texas reaching its overarching goals.  Though realizing that Democrats might not discipline one of their own for similar conduct, this side believes it needs to take "the high road" (especially given that Evangelical Christians who hold to Judeo-Christian moral values -- at least in theory -- are a major part of its voter base, as opposed to the predominantly secular and amoral -- if not immoral -- members of the Democrat voter base) and show its base (along with independent voters it wants to court at the next election) that they are willing to take action against one of their own -- regardless of that person's effectiveness or success in maintaining conservative Texas values -- for actions which are improper if not illegal.  This side points out that, earlier in May 2023, the entire Republican membership of the House voted (with no abstentions or absences) to expel [[Bryan Slaton]] for his actions involving inappropriate conduct by providing alcohol to an under-age intern<ref>The intern was 19 at the time.  Under Texas law, a person under age 21 can only be provided alcohol by his/her parents or spouse.</ref>, then having sexual relations with her, and then attempting to cover up the matter, in what was a one-time incident, while Paxton's actions are long-standing, on-going, and have far more serious repercussions for both those involved and the state as a whole.

*One side believes that notwithstanding Paxton's efforts and success against Federal overreach, his outside legal issues are a '''''distraction''''' to the Republican Party of Texas reaching its overarching goals.  Though realizing that Democrats might not discipline one of their own for similar conduct, this side believes it needs to take "the high road" (especially given that Evangelical Christians who hold to Judeo-Christian moral values -- at least in theory -- are a major part of its voter base, as opposed to the predominantly secular and amoral -- if not immoral -- members of the Democrat voter base) and show its base (along with independent voters it wants to court at the next election) that they are willing to take action against one of their own -- regardless of that person's effectiveness or success in maintaining conservative Texas values -- for actions which are improper if not illegal.  This side points out that, earlier in May 2023, the entire Republican membership of the House voted (with no abstentions or absences) to expel [[Bryan Slaton]] for his actions involving inappropriate conduct by providing alcohol to an under-age intern<ref>The intern was 19 at the time.  Under Texas law, a person under age 21 can only be provided alcohol by his/her parents or spouse.</ref>, then having sexual relations with her, and then attempting to cover up the matter, in what was a one-time incident, while Paxton's actions are long-standing, on-going, and have far more serious repercussions for both those involved and the state as a whole.

*The other side believes that the actions were taken '''''because of''''', and hopefully to '''''stop''''', Paxton's efforts and success against Federal overreach, and that his legal isues (along with the impeachment) are part of a plot by [[dark money]] [[globalist]]s who allegedly control most Texas Republican officials.  Those who hold to the latter view generally believe the entire process is "an ambush without notice to voters", and have also alleged that Texas Governor [[Greg Abbott]] (Paxton's predecessor as Attorney General) may have been jealous of Paxton or viewed him as a younger potential rival, and as a result used his fundraising power from the [[Texas oligarchy]] to swing nearly 60 Texas House Republicans into supporting impeachment.  They also believe that Lieutenant Governor [[Dan Patrick]], who presides as President of the Texas Senate when it is in session and during any trial for removal, has "stacked the deck" against Paxton in deciding who will determine the rules and what those rules will be, notably by having the chair be "a non-lawyer Abbott-loyalist".

*The other side believes that the actions were taken '''''because of''''', and hopefully to '''''stop''''', Paxton's efforts and success against Federal overreach, and that his legal isues (along with the impeachment) are part of a plot by [[dark money]] [[globalist]]s who allegedly control most Texas Republican officials.  Those who hold to the latter view generally believe the entire process is "an ambush without notice to voters", and have also alleged that Texas Governor [[Greg Abbott]] (Paxton's predecessor as Attorney General) may have been jealous of Paxton or viewed him as a younger potential rival, and as a result used his fundraising power from the [[Texas oligarchy]] to swing nearly 60 Texas House Republicans into supporting impeachment.  They also believe that Lieutenant Governor [[Dan Patrick]], who presides as President of the Texas Senate when it is in session and during any trial for removal, has "stacked the deck" against Paxton in deciding who will determine the rules and what those rules will be, notably by having the chair be "a non-lawyer Abbott-loyalist".

The Collin County Republican Party passed a resolution condemning the impeachment; however, it has chosen not to publicly post it.  On the other hand, the Republican Party of Texas posted their resolution condemning the impeachment.<ref>https://texasgop.org/paxtonimpeachment/</ref>

The Collin County Republican Party passed a resolution condemning the impeachment; however, it has chosen not to publicly post it.  On the other hand, the Republican Party of Texas posted their resolution condemning the impeachment.<ref>https://texasgop.org/paxtonimpeachment/</ref>

Governor Abbott has not publicly commented on the matter.  His only action has been to appoint John Scott, a former Deputy Attorney General and a former Secretary of State, as the interim replacement for Paxton.<ref>https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-appoints-john-scott-as-interim-attorney-general-of-texas</ref> Notwithstanding that Scott is politically loyal to Abbott, one of his first actions was to continue Paxton's policy of suing the Biden Administration for Federal overreach, this time over its attempts to rewrite Title IX to force schools to adopt favorable pro-transgender policies or lose Federal education funding.<ref>https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/texas-launches-lawsuit-against-bidens-unlawful-title-ix-guidance-forcing-transgender-policies</ref>

Governor Abbott has not publicly commented on the matter.  His only action has been to appoint John Scott, a former Deputy Attorney General and a former Secretary of State, as the interim replacement for Paxton.<ref>https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-appoints-john-scott-as-interim-attorney-general-of-texas</ref> Notwithstanding that Scott is politically loyal to Abbott, one of his first actions was to continue Paxton's policy of suing the Biden Administration for Federal overreach, this time over its attempts to rewrite Title IX to force schools to adopt favorable pro-transgender policies or lose Federal education funding.<ref>https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/texas-launches-lawsuit-against-bidens-unlawful-title-ix-guidance-forcing-transgender-policies</ref>

=== Retaliation by [[Gambling]] Industry? ===

=== Retaliation by [[Gambling]] Industry? ===