Reports Conclude Paxton Did Not Violate Laws Or Office Procedure

Attorney General Paxton officially began his third term as Attorney General in January 2023. [Photo courtesy Texas Attorney General's Office]

Now, there are two reports that have disproved claims made about Attorney General Ken Paxton by Democratically-aligned counsel hired by the House General Investigating Committee.

A report released Saturday following an impeachment vote by the Texas House concluded, “significant evidence to show the actions of the OAG toward the Complainants were based on legitimate, non-retaliatory, business grounds.”

The Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”) released the comprehensive report by an outside law firm, Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, that unequivocally refutes testimony that was heard in the House General Investigating Committee.

Despite the fact that testimony includes inaccuracies, falsehoods, and misstatements, the Texas House chose to proceed with the impeachment of Paxton.  

The General Investigating Committee’s investigation against Paxton is predicated on long-disproven claims grounded in hearsay and gossip. In August of 2021, after nearly a year of diligent investigation into these claims from former employees, the Office of the Attorney General released an exhaustive report that ultimately refuted each of the former employees’ allegations. In that report, the OAG stated it would further investigate the allegations and supplement as necessary. Subsequently, the OAG retained an outside law firm to conduct further investigation into the claims of retaliation by the former employees.  

The Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith law firm investigation culminated in a report that documents the OAG’s legitimate, non-retaliatory grounds for terminating each of these individuals.

According to Paxton, the report, along with other clarifying and ultimately exonerating information, could have been readily available to the committee investigators had they merely asked. 

An official from the Office of the Attorney General was physically present at a hearing of the House General Investigating Committee on Thursday, May 25. The official offered to testify and sought to inform the House General Investigating Committee about this matter, including by supplying the report, which the official had a physical copy of with him. However, the House General Investigating Committee specifically chose to ignore the official’s offer to testify.

Paxton says the Committee was “narrowly focused on advancing an illegal action that would disenfranchise voters who duly elected the Attorney General. They were not interested in the truth. They were interested only in crafting a highly curated, one-sided case to overthrow the will of the voters.”