Welp. That was quick. The House Committee on General Investigating recommended impeachment for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The vote was unanimous. Three members of the five-member panel are Republicans. Republicans have majorities in the Texas House and Senate.

This goes to the Nate Paul case. I wrote about it in 2020 when the FBI served Paxton with a subpoena amid the SCOTUS election lawsuit. So, when he entered the proceedings on Thursday, he was aware of the possibility of an impeachment recommendation. The committee heard from investigators on Wednesday that showed the attorney general used his office to provide confidential FBI documents to his friend and campaign donor Nate Paul.

The investigation was triggered by Paxton’s attempt to use $3.3M in taxpayer money to settle a whistleblower lawsuit. That lawsuit alleges Paxton retaliated against former office aides by firing them when they reported him to federal authorities. The case was opened in March. Prosecutors told the committee that Paxton could have committed felony offenses such as abuse of official capacity and misuse of official information.

Paxton denies any wrongdoing. He dismissed the testimony from investigators as false and accused them of being highly partisan Democrat lawyers. The said the lawyers want to mislead and manipulate the public.

pic.twitter.com/snePs9YtjV

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) May 24, 2023

Paxton is no stranger to trouble. He came into office under a cloud and nothing has changed. He isn’t just facing possible impeachment now. He has been indicted for felony security fraud charges and is awaiting trial. The Department of Justice is also investigating him for alleged misconduct.

He keeps getting elected, despite the alleged misconduct. He was just re-elected last year.

This is an unprecedented move. The committee cited years of alleged misconduct and lawbreaking. After the unanimous vote to refer the articles of impeachment to the full chamber, the House will decide whether or not to approve the articles of impeachment. If approved, he can be removed from office pending the outcome of a trial in the Senate. It can’t be understated how extraordinary this is. No Legislature has impeached an attorney general. That action is usually reserved for public officials who face serious allegations of abuse of power.

There was some last-minute drama on Thursday when a representative from Paxton’s office demanded to testify before the House committee. He called the committee’s actions “illegal.”

Chris Hilton, chief of general litigation for the attorney general’s office, interrupted the five-member panel’s brief meeting to demand to testify on behalf of Paxton’s office. State Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, shook his head and moved forward with the meeting, which went into executive session almost immediately after gaveling in.

“The people deserve to hear from this office in the context of this investigation,” Hilton said. “The voters want Ken Paxton, and this committee — by investigating him, by not allowing us to be heard here today, by never reaching out to us at any time during this investigative process — is trying to thwart the will of the voters. We deserve to be heard here today.”

Once the committee returned from meeting in private, members voted to issue “preservation letters” directing the Department of Public Safety and the Texas Facilities Commission to protect pertinent information. The committee did not discuss what information it wanted preserved.

Many of the allegations were already known but the public airing revealed the wide scope of the investigation. The committee has broad power to investigate state officials for wrongdoing. Three weeks ago the House expelled Rep. Bryan Slaton on its recommendation.

Under the Texas Constitution, Governor Abbott can appoint a provisional replacement if Paxton is suspended pending the completion of a Senate trial. The support of two-thirds of senators is required to remove him from office. It’s only happened twice in Texas history.

Paxton has few allies left in the Legislature. Last week he demanded that the Speaker of the House after video surfaced of what looked like an intoxicated Speaker presiding over the House. His words were slurred and he seemed disorientated. That accusation wasn’t proved.