By Patrick Svitek 

The Texas Tribune

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

"Former chief of staff for AG’s office details alarm over Ken Paxton’s alleged affair" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

The Texas Tribune is your source for in-depth reporting on the Ken Paxton impeachment trial. Readers make that possible. Support authoritative Texas journalism with a donation now.

Attorney General Ken Paxton’s alleged extramarital affair came up for the first time at length Monday in his impeachment trial.

Katherine “Missy” Cary, the former chief of staff in the attorney general’s office, testified how she came to learn about the affair and how Paxton ultimately confessed to it. But perhaps most relevant to the case, Cary testified how she warned Paxton it could make him vulnerable to bribery, an allegation central to his impeachment.

The dramatic testimony came as Paxton’s wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, listened on from the Senate floor.

“My heart broke for her,” Cary said of Angela Paxton, who is disqualified from voting in the trial but has to attend.

The alleged affair is referenced in one of the articles of impeachment that is being tried. The article accuses Paxton of bribery because he “benefited from Nate Paul’s employment of a woman with whom Paxton was having an extramarital affair.”

House impeachment managers allege that Paxton, driven by his desire to continue his affair and hide it from his wife and religious voters, went to impeachable and criminal lengths to help Paul. In exchange, they allege, Paul hired Olson at his company so that she could move from San Antonio to Austin.

While Paxton's alleged affair has increasingly taken center stage since the House impeached him in June, Cary marked the first time a witness provided firsthand knowledge of it — and in painful detail. Upon cross-examination, Paxton lawyer Tony Buzbee sought to stir doubt about the veracity of some of Cary's early observations of the alleged affair and downplayed its relevance to the case.

[Ken Paxton tried to hide his affair from his wife and voters. It may be his undoing.]

"Imagine if we impeached everybody here in Austin that had had an affair," Buzbee said. "We’d be impeaching for the next 100 years, wouldn’t we?"

Cary testified that her knowledge of the alleged affair all began in the spring of 2018 when she was eating lunch alone at Galaxy Cafe in Austin. She overheard a woman next to her having a conversation that troubled her, suggesting the woman was conveying “very personal” information about Ken Paxton. Cary said she took her concerns to the attorney general, who said the woman was the real estate agent selling his condo in Austin.

But later that spring, Cary said she saw the same woman at an official event in San Antonio and saw her name tag: Laura Olson.

Cary said she then learned about the relationship from other people in the office and felt “surprised” Paxton had lied to her about who Olson was. The relationship was impacting staff morale, Cary added, with Angela Paxton calling the office to try to track down her husband and staffers feeling “uncomfortable answering those questions.”

Cary eventually had a meeting with Paxton where they discussed the legal and “ethical implications of a secret affair,” she said. Cary said they discussed that such conduct could “open one up to bribery and misuse of office” — allegations at the center of his impeachment.

In that meeting, Cary said Paxton confirmed he was having an affair but did not say whether it was with Olson. He was “contrite and he listened to what I had to say very carefully,” Cary recalled.

In September 2018, Paxton and his wife convened a meeting with top aides where he confessed to the affair, Cary said. She described it as an awkward and emotional meeting. Angela Paxton was “sad and embarrassed” and cried, Cary said. Cary said she hugged Angela Paxton and told her she was sorry this had happened to her.

After that meeting, Cary said, she believed such behavior was “out of [Paxton’s] life for good.”

But months later in 2019, Cary said, Paxton told her the affair was continuing. Cary said Paxton expressed that he "still loved Mrs. Olson" and wanted Cary, as the chief of staff, to "be more accommodating" of it when it came to things like his security detail.

Cary said she told Paxton "quite bluntly it wasn't my business who he was sleeping with, but that when things boiled over in to the office," it became a concern to her. In Cary's telling, that comment enraged Paxton, who turned "red in the face," raised his voice and stormed out of her office.

Buzbee took an aggressive tack in cross-examining Cary. After initially trying to put her at ease, he launched into an interrogation of her account of how she first came to learn about Olson. Buzbee accused Cary of getting wrong the kind of car Olson had at Galaxy Cafe, saying Olson has "never owned a red car." Cary said she never claimed the car she saw belonged to Olson.

"I guess I'm trying to figure out how good is your memory," Buzbee said.

Buzbee did not explicitly mention Paxton's alleged adultery. But he cast such misbehavior in religious terms, first asking Cary if she attended church. She initially resisted answering, questioning whether it was an appropriate question. But Buzbee insisted it was relevant and asked her, in an allusion to God, if there was "only one person who was ever perfect." She agreed that is the case in her belief system.

"All have sinned and fallen short of the grace of God, right?" Buzbee asked, to which Cary agreed. "Sometimes people make stupid mistakes, right?"

That is when Buzbee raised the possibility of impeaching anybody in Austin who has had an affair. Cary declined to respond to the hypothetical, saying, "I don't think I should answer this question in this chamber, particularly."

"Just because somebody has an affair doesn't mean that they're a quote criminal, does it?" Buzbee asked, to which Cary said she "would not associate that directly."

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

By Patrick Svitek and Zach Despart 

The Texas Tribune

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

"Texas Senate rejects all motions to dismiss Ken Paxton impeachment charges" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

The Texas Tribune is your source for in-depth reporting on the Ken Paxton impeachment trial. Readers make that possible. Support authoritative Texas journalism with a donation now.

The Texas Senate on Tuesday rejected all of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s efforts to dismiss the articles of impeachment against him, moving forward with the first removal proceeding against a statewide elected official in more than a century.

The rapid-fire series of votes on 16 pretrial motions made clear that senators want to at least hear the evidence against Paxton before deciding his fate. And the vote counts provided an early gauge of how willing GOP senators may be to remove a fellow Republican from statewide office.

While the House vote to impeach Paxton was overwhelming and bipartisan, the Senate offers a different political landscape. Its Republican members are more in line with Paxton's brand of conservatism, and he has more personal connections in the chamber where he once served and his wife remains a member.

The pretrial motions required a majority vote, but the most support a motion to dismiss received was 10 out of 30 senators — all Republicans — and that motion sought to throw out a single article.

Six Republican senators supported every motion in a nod of support for Paxton: Paul Bettencourt of Houston, Donna Campbell of New Braunfels, Brandon Creighton of Conroe, Bob Hall of Edgewood, Lois Kolkhorst of Brenham and Tan Parker of Flower Mound. Half of those senators — Bettencourt, Campbell and Parker — are up for reelection next year.

Five Republicans — Brian Birdwell of Granbury, Bryan Hughes of Mineola, Charles Perry of Lubbock, Charles Schwertner of Georgetown and Kevin Sparks of Midland — voted in favor of at least one motion to dismiss.

The remaining seven Republicans voted with all 12 Democrats against each motion. Those senators were Pete Flores of Pleasanton, Kelly Hancock of North Richland Hills, Joan Huffman of Houston, Mayes Middleton of Galveston, Robert Nichols of Jacksonville and Drew Springer of Muenster.

Setting the tone, the Senate denied Paxton’s first two motions by votes of 24-6 and 22-8.

The first motion asked the Senate to throw out every article of impeachment for lack of evidence. Twelve Republicans joined all Senate Democrats in the vote to essentially move forward with a trial.

The second motion asked senators to exclude evidence from before January, when Paxton’s current four-year term began. That motion struck at the heart of one of Paxton’s main arguments — that he cannot be impeached for any actions allegedly taken before he was reelected last year. Paxton's defenders have repeatedly cited the so-called forgiveness doctrine to criticize the House impeachment as illegal.

The House impeached Paxton in May, alleging a yearslong pattern of lawbreaking and misconduct. He was immediately suspended from his job, and the Senate trial, which started at 9 a.m. Tuesday, will determine whether he is permanently removed from office.

There were two dozen pretrial motions. A simple majority was required to approve 16 of them because they sought to dismissal all or some of the articles of impeachment. The presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, was allowed to rule on the other motions unilaterally.

Notably, Patrick granted Paxton's motion that prevents the suspended attorney general from being forced to testify in the trial. The House impeachment managers had opposed the motion, arguing that if Paxton wanted to avoid self-incrimination, he could take advantage of his Fifth Amendment right from the witness stand.

As the Senate proceeds to a trial, a two-thirds vote is required to convict Paxton. That means that if all 12 Democrats vote to convict, half the remaining 18 Republican with a vote would have to join them. Paxton's wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, is disqualified from voting but allowed to attend the trial.

Trial deliberations are private, so the process of voting on the pretrial motions followed a dry routine Tuesday morning. Senators submitted their votes in writing, the Senate secretary announced each senators' votes from the front mic, reading them off in random order, and Patrick verified each vote from the dais.

The motion to dismiss that got the most support — 10 votes‚ sought to individually dismiss Article 8. That article accuses Paxton of disregarding his official duties by pursuing a taxpayer-funded settlement with former top staffers who reported concerns about his relationship with Paul to the FBI in 2020.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune. 

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

By Chuck Lindell and James Barragán The Texas Tribune

The Texas House adopted 20 articles of impeachment against state Attorney General Ken Paxton in late May on a 121-23 vote, with 60 Republicans in favor as 23 opposed. Paxton was immediately suspended from office, without pay, upon approval of House Resolution 2377.

When the Senate adopted its rules for the trial, however, senators elected to hear evidence on 16 articles — holding four in abeyance that were largely related to 2015 criminal charges against Paxton for private business deals in 2011 and 2012. At the end of the trial, a majority of senators can vote to dismiss the four remaining articles, but if the motion to dismiss is rejected, the presiding officer will set a trial date on those four accusations.

With the Senate sitting as a court of impeachment beginning Monday, these 16 articles will form the basis of Paxton's trial:

Article 1, disregard of official duty

Paxton violated the duties of his office by failing to protect a charitable organization by directing employees to intervene in a lawsuit between the nonprofit Mitte Foundation and Austin real estate investor Nate Paul, a Paxton friend and political donor. “Paxton harmed the Mitte Foundation in an effort to benefit Paul,” the resolution said.

Article 2, disregard of official duty

Paxton misused his official power to issue written legal opinions to help Paul avoid foreclosure sales of properties owned by Paul and his businesses.​​ Paxton concealed his actions by soliciting state Sen. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, to seek the attorney general’s opinion as a “straw requestor,” the resolution said, adding that Paxton also directed employees to reverse their legal conclusions in ways that helped Paul.

Article 3, disregard of official duty

Paxton misused his official power to administer the state’s public information laws by directing employees to act contrary to the law on an open records request for Department of Public Safety documents and in another unspecified case.

Article 4, disregard of official duty

Paxton misused his power to administer public information laws to obtain previously undisclosed information held by his office “for the purpose of providing the information to the benefit of Nate Paul,” the resolution said.

Article 5, disregard of official duty

Paxton misused his official powers by violating the laws regarding how outside attorneys should be appointed. Paxton hired Brandon Cammack, a lawyer of five years, to investigate a “baseless complaint” made by Paul, who had accused federal and state investigators of improperly searching his home and businesses. Cammack responded by issuing 30 grand jury subpoenas in an effort to help Paul, the resolution said.

Article 6, disregard of official duty

Paxton violated his duties of office by firing or retaliating against employees in violation of the Texas Whistleblowers Act, which protects public employees who make good-faith reports of potentially illegal action to law enforcement.

“Paxton terminated the employees without good cause or due process and in retaliation for reporting his illegal acts and improper conduct,” the resolution said. “Furthermore, Paxton engaged in a public and private campaign to impugn the employees’ professional reputations or prejudice their future employment.”

Article 7, misapplication of public resources

Paxton misused public resources by directing employees to conduct a “sham investigation” into the whistleblowers’ complaints, leading the attorney general’s office to publish “a lengthy written report containing false or misleading statements in Paxton’s defense.”

In August 2021, the attorney general’s office issued an unsigned, 374-page internal report clearing him of wrongdoing in the allegations made by the fired employees.

Article 8, disregard of official duty

Paxton misused his official powers by “concealing his wrongful acts in connection with the whistleblower complaints.” To settle the whistleblowers’ lawsuit, Paxton agreed to pay them $3.3 million from public funds. The agreement “conspicuously delayed the discovery of facts and testimony at trial, to Paxton’s advantage” and deprived voters of the opportunity to make an informed decision in the 2022 election for attorney general, the resolution said.

Article 9, constitutional bribery

Paxton engaged in bribery in violation of Article 16 of the Texas Constitution when he benefited from Paul’s decision to employ a woman “with whom Paxton was having an extramarital affair.”

“Paul received favorable legal assistance from, or specialized access to, the office of the attorney general,” the resolution said.

Article 10, constitutional bribery

Paxton engaged in bribery in violation of Article 16 of the Texas Constitution when Paul provided extensive renovations to Paxton’s Austin home. In return, Paul received favorable legal help from Paxton’s agency.

Article 15, false statements in official records

Paxton made, or caused others to make, multiple false or misleading statements in his office’s response to the whistleblowers’ claims in an effort to mislead the public and public officials. In August 2021, the attorney general’s office issued an unsigned, 374-page internal report clearing him of wrongdoing in the allegations made by the fired employees.

Article 16, conspiracy and attempted conspiracy

While in office, Paxton acted with others to conspire, or attempt to conspire, to commit the crimes described in the other articles.

Article 17, misappropriation of public resources

Paxton misused his official powers by causing employees to perform services for his benefit and the benefit of others.

The committee’s investigators said Paxton had diverted employees to perform work that benefited Paul, costing the state at least $72,000 in taxpayer-funded labor. He also hired Cammack for $25,000.

Article 18, dereliction of duty

Paxton violated the Texas Constitution, his oaths of office, plus statutes and public policy against public officials acting against the public interest.

Article 19, unfitness for office

Paxton engaged in private and public misconduct, described in the articles, that “indicate his unfitness for office,” the resolution said.

Article 20, abuse of public trust

Paxton subverted the lawful operation of Texas government by using, misusing or failing to use his official powers and obstructed the fair and impartial administration of justice, bringing the attorney general’s office “into scandal and disrepute,” which harmed the public’s confidence in the state’s government.

These four articles were held in abeyance:

• Article 11, obstruction of justice — Paxton abused the judicial process to thwart justice by causing “protracted” delays after a Collin County grand jury indicted him for securities fraud for soliciting investors in Servergy Inc. without disclosing that the McKinney tech company was paying him to round up investors. Those delays “deprived the electorate of its opportunity to make an informed decision when voting for attorney general,” the resolution said.
• Article 12, obstruction of justice — Paxton abused the judicial process to thwart justice when Jeff Blackard, a donor to his campaigns, took legal action that “disrupted payment of the prosecutors” in the securities fraud case against him, causing a protracted delay in the case.
• Article 13, false statements in official records — Before and after holding public office, Paxton made false statements to mislead the public and public officials by lying to the State Securities Board during its investigation of Paxton’s failure to register as an investment adviser as required by state law.
• Article 14, false statements in official records — Before and during his time in office, Paxton made false statements on personal finance statements required by Texas law by failing to “fully and accurately disclose his financial interests” on disclosure forms.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy.