Breaking: Texas Governor Rick Perry Indicted on Two Felonies

rick-perry-idiot-1Texas Governor Rick Perry was indicted Friday on two felonies for abuse of power and coercion of a public servant.

This all stems from his threat, then eventual veto, of $7.5 million in funding for the Travis County Public Integrity Unit last year. All this was brought about when District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg refused to resign from her position at the TCPL following her guilty plea for a DUI.

Following her guilty plea she served out her 45-day sentence and mandated treatment program.

Rick Perry had made it clear that he planned to veto funding for the agency unless she resigned.  When she didn’t, Perry carried through with his veto promise.

In other words, he committed a blatant and illegal abuse of power.

But the story doesn’t stop there.  The real motive behind his push to get Lehmberg to resign seems to have been due in large part to the fact that she was currently investigating possible corruption charges into a project Perry had been strongly behind.

And if she resigned, guess who would have gotten to appoint her replacement?

Rick Perry.  

Because nothing at all seems corrupt about pushing for the resignation of the person investigating you for corruption – so that you can appoint their replacement. 

After investigating the case since April, special prosecutor Michael McCrum ultimately decided to file charges.

Though, as expected, Rick Perry is denying all allegations.

So, let’s paint this picture a bit, shall we?

Rick Perry is being investigated by Lehmberg on possible corruption charges. She’s arrested for a DUI, prompting Perry to push for her resignation claiming that she had “lost trust” with the people.  Then, to try to force her resignation, he threatens to veto funding to her agency.  Following her decision not to resign, he then carries out that veto.

And had she chosen to resign, he would have been able to select the replacement to the agency investigating his office for corruption.

This seems pretty open and shut to me.  Perry made a threat, carried out with that threat and by all indicators, in my opinion, that’s an obvious abuse of power.

But the kicker in all of this is the fact that this agency was investigating possible corruption charges against Perry, and had she resigned, he would have been able to select who took over the investigation.

And who here believes he would have selected someone who would have been impartial?

In other words, he’s now being charged with an abuse of power and coercion of a public official because he wasn’t able to rig an ongoing investigation into possible corruption within his office.

Nothing quite like trying to cover up possible corruption charges by blatantly abusing your power.


Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Alan Chesterton

    Oops!

  • Nemisis

    Wonder if the DUI stop was rigged as well.

    • Serioulsy?

      Yep, they poured booze down her throat, put her in her car and made her drive so they could pull her over. She then decided to not fight the charges, take responsibility for it even though she didn’t do it, and have a criminal record, just so she could stand up to Rick Perry and not do what he wanted.

      • Dennis Frisby

        ROOFIES, you stupid clam

      • Gillian mcintyre

        Oh I’m guessing you were waiting in line to stand up to the almighty corrupt Rick
        Perry, have you thought that she may have been the only person that had power to blast Perry’s activity, I’m just saying

  • damienjaymz

    What I like appreciate reading in all this is that Lehmberg (forgive me if I misspelled that) took responsibility for driving drunk. She plead guilty, did her time and treatment and went on with her life. She didn’t deny she did it and make it a huge publicity stunt. Having been there myself, and having friends that have been through the DUI process, it shows character. For myself, I would trust her to still do her job after she did her time.

    Lehmberg
    Lehmberg

    • Concerned

      Calling a cab, walking, having a designated driver, all those show character. Getting a DUI shows a lack of judgment, taking responsibility for it should not be rewarded or lauded, it should be expected.
      If she would have killed someone and taken responsibility, would you think she still showed character?
      Please stop excusing people that break the law because they share your political beliefs. It dilutes the credibility of the party. If she was a republican, would you still be okay with it, or would you be calling for her resignation?

      • Dennis Frisby

        Human nature can be messy (just thought that since you’re perfect and have lived a spotless life I’d point that out)

      • william wilson

        You are correct. This is not a perfect world we live in. One should own up to their mistakes and get on with their life.Perry abused his position

      • Richard Desjardin

        And Lehmberg committed a crime, a very dangerous…and underpunished crime.

      • iowasteve

        By the way abuse of power IS A CRIME just as well.

      • Joseph Smith

        If she had caused an accident and gotten somebody hurt or killed, sure. But for making a mistake, dealing with it and moving on with her life? It strikes me that if she had been a problematic repeat offender, it would have been alot more than the sentence shown here. I don’t think she deserves to be rewarded or lauded for her actions, but she doesn’t deserve to be demonized either.

      • Laquita Hurd

        @Concerned. I believe regardless if party she deserved a second chance. In today’s society assuming responsibility does not happen. So pull the shade up in your house, take off your sunglasses and clean the wax out of your ears. She admitted her wrong doing!!!!! Hmm? If you are pure without fault go ahead and throw that stone.

      • nobody

        She made a mistake didnt hurt anyone should her life be ruined for that…..i guess you never ever made a bad decision.#tojudgemental

      • Stephen Barlow

        Then RICK PERRY SHOULD RESIGN MONDAY!!

      • Richard Desjardin

        Exactly,

        Rick Perry is a dick. Don’t get me wrong. The dude is everything that is wrong with the Republican Party. Still, it’s pretty standard procedure resign when you’re a public official who has been caught doing something illegal.

        I don’t like the idea of penalizing an entire department to teach a lesson to one employee.

        It would be nice to know what the initial corruption charges are in regards to.

      • Kevin Durette

        George W was convicted of a DUI and cocaine possession and still managed to get elected. I agree a DUI is a serious lack of judgment, but corruption is a much bigger flaw in an elected official. Perry was using the DUI as an excuse to get out from under the microscope.

      • iowasteve

        She did not kill anyone. And it is funny that you would continue to attack her for doing the right thing and taking responsibility – but when it comes to Rick Perry – I’m sure you are defending him to the end – and he has committed crimes and is NOT taking responsibility for them and in fact, outright denying them. I would say this is one difference between democrat and republican – espeically in Texas.

      • Michael Siever

        If Lehmberg was a Republican, Rick Perry would have defended her to the death. But then again, if he could appoint somebody to take her place and look the other way, so he and Abbott could engage in their alleged activities that Lehmberg was investigating which are far worse than DWI’s (Bribery, money laundering, etc.), he would just sigh, and replace her with his puppet at no gain or loss under your hypothetical scenario.

      • Kyle Walker

        So should we stop excusing Perry for breaking the law and overstepping his power several times in the past 14 years?

    • Stephen Barlow

      BUT THE BOTOM LINE IS: it has NOTHING to do with her job performance or ability to find corruption in Perry’s ‘project’.

  • Chris Isner

    Is there a GOPig presidential hopeful left that isn’t being investigated?

  • Cole Raney

    I am very torn on this. I am glad Rick Perry facing charges for what he did. We shouldn’t applaud the woman though.

    I am VERY against drinking and driving. I believe that if you are stupid enough to do it, then we shouldn’t risk them having a license anymore.

    • Dennis Frisby

      We should never judge the MANY (one time offenders) based on the few who are continual drunks who get the headlines.

      • iowasteve

        Cole was correct in this and, sorry, Dennis is dead wrong. Even first timers have killed people. As a matter of fact, I would be willing to put second hand alcohol right up there beside the argument about second hand smoke, but what stops me is that second hand smoke doesn’t kill (or hasn’t been proved to yet) and even so, not nearly as large a number as second hand alcohol. By that, I mean, the victims of the drunk besides himself. When a drunk drives and hits someone else who isn’t drunk, that is an excellent example of second hand alcohol in my opinion. And as for the fact that she couldn’t do her job without a license, in almost all cases of a suspended license, if the fines are paid and the time is done, most judges will provide a working license for that purpose.

      • Dennis Frisby

        You know nothing Jon Snow. Back up please.

      • iowasteve

        What do you want proven anyway? That people have killed others while drunk driving? I don’t think, if you aren’t drunk already that you need that.

      • Dennis Frisby

        I want absentee voters to be under the same scrutiny at those of us who take the time to go to the polls to vote. PROVE YOUR CITIZENSHIP. I can’t believe in this day and age people are so ignorant to think that it’s easier to commit voter fraud in person then to just drop a note in the mail and get to vote is stupid and for the record this conversation has NOTHING TO DO WITH DUI..

    • paul

      John 8:7

    • Jillz

      I agree about people who drink and drive having their licenses suspended, but unless they work as a driver, or their alcohol abuse is otherwise affecting their ability to do their jobs, they shouldn’t lose their jobs for it, especially if they have already been punished through proper legal channels (which she had).

  • Cemetery Girl

    Poor choice on her part to drive after drinking, but was published accordingly. There was no reason for her to be forced to resign. (Most people are not dismissed from their job for a DUI.)

    • Charles Vincent

      Few questions here
      1) in most states don’t people lose their license for a minimum of three months for a DUI conviction?
      2) in the case of the above I am sure that this lady drove a fleet vehicle in performance of her duty as district attorney and was
      A) uninsurable under such a fleet policy
      B) had no license to drive said vehicle
      3) given the above how could she perform her duties as DA? And why would the county not replace her?
      4) this whole article stinks to no end of affluency of people with money getting a different set of rules than joe from the block.

      • iowasteve

        I didn’t remember reading anyplace that said she didn’t have alices. And try telling everyone that George Bush should have lost his license for a minimum of 3 months. He even tried to cover that all up when he was elected. Talk about something that stinks to no end? And what about Perry trying to get her to resign knowing that she is investigating him for the exact thing that he was doing to her now? And finally, if he had real cause to remove her, couldn’t he just fire her??? Asking her to resign indicates he had no legal reason for her removal from her position – or you can bet that would have happened instead. You complete reply to this is not a very good one. I can also tell you that in many many many states first time DUI convictions (although require mandatory jail as well as loss of license) doesn’t result in even one day in jail. And when I lived in Texas, you could have open container in your vehicle legally – so unless that law changed, I would say the laws are not as strict as they should be maybe.

      • Charles Vincent

        1) not sure what you mean by “I didn’t remember reading anyplace that said she didn’t have alices.”

        in particular what and “alice” is.

        2) we are not talking about GWB we are talking about the DA in the article.

        3) You said ” And finally, if he had real cause to remove her, couldn’t he just fire her???”, and it’s clear she could not perform her job as my queries from my OP illustrated.

        Furthermore this;

        “And finally, if he had real cause to remove her, couldn’t he just fire her???”

        Is not supported by facts to my knowledge, either provide them or refrain from fallacious arguments.

        and lastly;

        “And when I lived in Texas, you could have open container in your vehicle legally”
        This was probably the passenger not the driver.

      • iowasteve

        I’ll admit, at this time, I’m not sure what Alices is supposed to mean – it was a typo for sure – just not sure what the proper word was right now.

        You said – this is not about GWB – well, in a way it is about him just as much. He was convicted of several DUIs and it did not remove him from any office, nor did it prevent him from being POTUS – so why should this time be any different? OH wait, of course it’s different – she’s a liberal and the person she’s investigating (her boss) is a right wing nut case! That’s the difference. And I will stand by my statement that if he really had just cause for her to be terminated, then it would have happened and he wouldn’t have just asked her to resign. That’s pretty typical in any situation or job. And what difference does it make passenger or driver? In almost every other state, open container in ANY MOVING VEHICLE is illegal. And the reason makes perfect sense. I do not drink at all – so I’m not taking her side due to that influence either. In fact, I wish they would ban alcohol again or at least tax the hell out of it!

      • Charles Vincent

        ” He was convicted of several DUIs and it did not remove him from any office, nor did it prevent him from being POTUS”

        here is the problem with this when did they happen were they during his time ia gov or were they berofre or after?

        Secondly I am not saying it should disqualify her in the future from being DA just that now in the present she should step down.

        “so why should this time be any different? OH wait, of course it’s different – she’s a liberal and the person she’s investigating (her boss) is a right wing nut case!”

        Clear conflict of interest in this case and second it doesn’t matter I would be saying the same thing if it were a democrat governor telling a republican DA to resign in the same situation you should stop assuming what I think it makes you look stupid.

        “And I will stand by my statement that if he really had just cause for her to be terminated”

        The law in Texas allows the for people to be fired for drunkenness perhaps perry was being gracious in asking her to resign that would look better on the next job application than being fired just saying.

        ” And what difference does it make passenger or driver?”
        this should be self evident.

      • iowasteve

        Where in Texas law does it say that a county or state employee has to be fired for having a DUI?

      • Charles Vincent

        This is Texas state law

        “Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL. (a) An officer may be removed for:

        (1) incompetency;

        (2) official misconduct; or

        (3) intoxication on or off duty caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage.

        (b) Intoxication is not a ground for removal if it appears at the trial that the intoxication was caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage on the direction and prescription of a licensed physician practicing in this state.”

        List of officers that can be removed are as follows;

        “Sec. 87.012. OFFICERS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL. The district judge may, under this subchapter, remove from office:

        (1) a district attorney;

        (2) a county attorney;

        (3) a county judge;

        (4) a county commissioner;

        (5) a county clerk;

        (6) a district clerk;

        (7) a district and county clerk;

        (8) a county treasurer;

        (9) a sheriff;

        (10) a county surveyor;

        (11) a county tax assessor-collector;

        (12) a constable;

        (13) a justice of the peace;

        (14) a member of the board of trustees of an independent school district; and

        (15) a county officer, not otherwise named by this section, whose office is created under the constitution or other law of this state.”

      • iowasteve

        That may be why I failed to see the connection between my question and your answer. I was asking about laws providing that the DA was to be fired for a DUI and you gave me something completely different.

      • Charles Vincent

        A DUI is drunkeness and she was three times the legal limit from what I have been seeing in MSM across the board.

      • iowasteve

        Again if this is the case, then Bush should not have been Governor, and I’m pretty sure the Perry has been drunk a few times in his life as well. I’m sure if you asked the writers of the law, they would be sure to explain that that was meant to mean drunkenness on the job. I’m pretty sure almost no one would qualify for any of those positions – and that is probably why it was not pressed in this case either. The request to resign was totally political and you know it as well as everyone else.

      • Charles Vincent

        here are a few other things to consider;

        http://codes DOT lp DOT findlaw DOT com/txstatutes/PE/8/39/39.02

        http://codes DOT lp DOT findlaw DOT com/txstatutes/PE/8/36/36.03

        and

        http://www DOT texastribune DOT org/2013/04/19/politics-could-determine-travis-county-das-future/

        one thing that sort of puts a crimp on this situation IMHO is this
        “…lawsuit under a rarely used tenet of state law that authorizes the removal of county officials over drunkenness…”

      • iowasteve

        nothing in any of those links you provided have anything to do with being removed from office for getting a dui. In fact, it’s funny that the first two actually link to a twitter page!!! And the third one is a conservative news site. Where is the law in this? By the way – there is a link on the twitter pages that does, in fact, link to a law – but it is explaining what Perry is being charged with – nothing to do with the DA. Weird how things get messed up huh? Trying to prove your point by proving someone elses isn’t exactly how I expected this to go.

      • Charles Vincent

        Actually the first two are links to the laws that the indictment claims the governor broke here they are verbatim:

        TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 36.03 : Texas Statutes – Section 36.03: COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER
        (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:

        (1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty; or

        (2) influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner.

        (b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the coercion is a threat to commit a felony, in which event it is a felony of the third degree.

        (c) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (a)(1) of this section that the person who influences or attempts to influence the public servant is a member of the governing body of a governmental entity, and that the action that influences or attempts to influence the public servant is an official action taken by the member of the governing body. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “official action” includes deliberations by the governing body of a governmental entity.

        Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 67, Sec. 1, 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

        And

        TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 39.02 : Texas Statutes – Section 39.02: ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY
        (a) A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly:

        (1) violates a law relating to the public servant’s office or employment; or

        (2) misuses government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the government that has come into the public servant’s custody or possession by virtue of the public servant’s office or employment.

        (b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor.

        (c) An offense under Subsection (a)(2) is:

        (1) a Class C misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is less than $20;

        (2) a Class B misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is $20 or more but less than $500;

        (3) a Class A misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is $500 or more but less than $1,500;

        (4) a state jail felony if the value of the use of the thing misused is $1,500 or more but less than $20,000;

        (5) a felony of the third degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $20,000 or more but less than $100,000;

        (6) a felony of the second degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $100,000 or more but less than $200,000; or

        (7) a felony of the first degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $200,000 or more.

        (d) A discount or award given for travel, such as frequent flyer miles, rental car or hotel discounts, or food coupons, are not things of value belonging to the government for purposes of this section due to the administrative difficulty and cost involved in recapturing the discount or award for a governmental entity.

        Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3241, ch. 558, Sec. 7, eff. Sept. 1, 1983. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 39.01 and amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

      • Charles Vincent

        As to the indictments Perry has a constitutional power to line item veto anything he chooses to this isn’t a breach of the law. Secondly he can request she step down per Texas law and if she refuses he can charge her and take her to trial based on the Texas law which I listed, the indictment will most likely be thrown out if you read the laws that are relevant.

      • iowasteve

        I believe there would be more to the indictments that just a line item veto. And yes he does have that right – but he also is using coercion to get someone off his case and punishing the whole department because he is upset with one person in that department. He can call it whatever he wants and it is not up to you or I to determine who is right and wrong – it is up the judge in the hearing to do this. I, personally, would not want a jury in this case though because I’m sure he isn’t that well liked any longer. New glasses or not. I already answered the issue on his enforcing (or the lack thereof) of the intox law you quoted.

      • Charles Vincent

        You didn’t answer anything you just postulated opinion. And the law clearly stated that intoxication that results from either being intoxicated in public( which has a definition in Texas law) certainly applies to her DUI and therefore the law for removing public officials for drunkenness applies.

      • Pipercat

        This is from the Austin Chronicle on 4-18-14. Might clear some things up. Can you believe it was 90 last night and the dew point was 77 here in SA ;)!

        “Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg this morning pleaded guilty to drunk driving and was sentenced to 45 days in jail. After being sentenced she was cuffed and led to booking by a Travis County Sheriff’s deputy.

        Lehmberg smiled to her co-workers and friends who gathered in the first two rows of seats in Judge Carlos Barrera’s County
        Court-at-Law No. 8 just after 9:30am. Standing with her attorney David Sheppard, Lehmberg pleaded guilty after Barrera read the charge against her. Barrera then sentenced Lehmberg to 45 days in jail and a $4,000 fine – the maximum monetary fine for the Class A misdemeanor DWI charge.
        Lehmberg will also lose her driver’s license for 180 days beginning May 23.

        Lehmberg was arrested last Friday, April 12, and charged with drunken driving after a motorist called 911 shortly before 11pm to report an erratic driver on FM 620 near Comanche Trail. The driver of the car in question was Lehmberg, who told a sheriff’s deputy that she’d had two vodka drinks earlier in the evening; an open container of vodka was found in the passenger compartment of the car, according to an arrest
        affidavit.

        According to Sheppard, Lehmberg’s first-time DWI charge was enhanced from what would have been a class B misdemeanor (punishable by up to six months in jail) to a class A misdemeanor (punishable by up to a year in jail) because her blood-alcohol content was .23 – nearly three times the legal limit. The charge is upped to a class A when BAC is greater
        than .15.

        Lehmberg was released from jail early last Saturday, April 13, and the following day wrote a letter to County Attorney David Escamilla, whose office handles misdemeanor crimes, and to the county bench, saying that she would plead guilty to the crime and that she expected no leniency. Indeed, Sheppard said she was afforded no special treatment. “This is without a doubt the harshest sentence” a person would receive
        for a first-time DWI, Sheppard said.”

      • Charles Vincent

        Ouch well it was 85 here haha.

        From thie article it’s apparent she got a harsh deal piper but the other article conveniently left those facts out.
        How ever the article you shared reinforces my other two queries. It also brings up a few more thought.
        For instance
        1) is DWI the same as DUI?
        2) are all drinking and driving offenses regardless of BAC level considered misdemeanors in Texas, Barring the injury or death of another person?
        Here in my state all drinking and driving offenses are considered felonies. Fines vary as does jail time, then there are the alcohol classes. At least here.

      • Pipercat

        1, yes. 2, yes until the offenses add up. Not sure but number 4 becomes a felony here, methinks. Really? All DUI are felonies? Dang, smoke and drink at home.

      • Charles Vincent

        Hell I know a case here in my town where a guy got a DUI on a horse.

      • Pipercat

        I wonder if they booked the horse as an accessory?

      • Charles Vincent

        It’s entirely possible.

      • Charles Vincent

        There is also a new law that’s being considered here that would give everyone in the car a DUI if they have been drinking even if they are not driving.

      • Pipercat

        That one may get a challenge if passed. How do you reconcile someone passed out in the back seat, then the driver gets in later and operates the vehicle after the fact? Man, you all are getting goofier than Texicans…

      • Charles Vincent

        did I mention our state legislature is controlled by democrats. not sure there is correlation or not just saying. also we have a democrat governor, same addendum.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Given that logic anyone at all that gets a DUI should be fired. It does happen with people that have a job that requires them to drive (ex: truck driver), but in general they will not be fired because they receive a DUI. Yes, they may have to make alternate arrangements to get back and forth to work (although sometimes a judge will allow driving to and from work), but they are not fired automatically for the DUI. A DUI will not make it impossible to get auto insurance (at least if it is the first time), but it will increase the cost. Use of a business car is a benefit, but if a person would be found ineligable for the benefit it just wouldn’t be provided to that person. (Some people have medical conditions that restrict driving, have a license revoked for excessive traffic offenses, or just never got a drivers license, so they may not get use of a company vehicle but generally that won’t interfere with their ability to preform their job.)

      • Charles Vincent

        OK you have missed the question, fleet insurance wont insure you if you have a DUI cities and counties use fleets for employees. I dont know about insurance where you live but here you cannot get insurance on a suspended license period and when you get your licence back most states require you to carry an SR-22 for three years and fleet insurance will not cover people with SR22 on them

      • iowasteve

        OK once again you are slightly on the wrong side of the question (or answer). In some states you are required to have insurance if you have a drivers license regardless of if you even have a car! Ohio is one of those states and other states have the same stupid laws. Mostly republican states. Also, you keep talking about fleet insurance. Most state and local governments have no insurance on their “government owned vehicles”. They are self-insured. This even applies to police cars and fire trucks. They can allow any employee to drive them. What makes you think the DA has one of those vehicles? And if they do use them, why can’t the DA use her own vehicle instead? SR-22 part of your statement is correct with the exception that you stated “fleet insurance will not cover people with SR22 on them”. This isn’t always the case either. There are many companies that it doesn’t matter, but will cost the insured more for those employees. They won’t cover someone with a suspended license – no – of course not. Cities and counties use city owned vehicles – NOT fleet vehicles. They own them instead of renting them because it is cheaper – they have more control over them – and do not require outside insurance – as they are self-insured.

      • Cemetery Girl

        I live in Ohio. If you have a car you must have insurance, but our auto insurance is connected to a vehicle. If there is no vehicle to have insurance on then it can’t be done, but if there is a vehicle then anyone in the household with a drivers license must be covered. I’m not sure if they’ve discontinued the practice but the state did send random proof of insurance notices. It was based on vehicle registration and you would have to submit proof of insurance. Failure to do so would result in a suspended license.

      • iowasteve

        You are mistaken in the Ohio insurance law. If you have a drivers license you MUST have insurance. They call it “non owner insurance”. I got a suspended license for this law and did not own a vehicle. If you wish to check it out you may. Many people get a “bond” rather than actual insurance to cover the requirement. This is probably why you are asked ot sign an affidavit when you get your drivers license or renew it. Yes, insurance is connected to a vehicle, but also in Ohio it’s connected to your drivers license.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Is it required she absolutely has to use one of their vehicles? That she is required to use one of government vehicles? Seems like a waste of budget to pay for a car… And unless she was intoxicated during her working hours it should not be held against her on the job.

      • Charles Vincent

        I would think the county would want her to use their vehicles when she is acting in her official capacity as DA.

        ” And unless she was intoxicated during her working hours it should not be held against her on the job.”

        Texas law concerning intoxication of public officials;

        “Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL.

        (a) An officer may be removed for:

        (1) incompetency;

        (2) official misconduct; or

        (3) intoxication on or off duty caused by
        drinking an alcoholic beverage.

        (b) Intoxication is not a ground for removal if
        it appears at the trial that the intoxication was caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage on the direction and prescription of a licensed physician
        practicing in this state.”

      • iowasteve

        I read the law you posted – now, I can guarantee you, this law has not been upheld or enforced in any way shape or form. This is like the law in Ohio that says you can be arrested for a misdemeanor for spitting on the sidewalk. That law you quoted includes a large number of people who we both know drink on the weekends at least and generally will be intoxicated on more than one occasion here and there. Are you kidding me? None of those people have ever gotten intoxicated off duty???? I’m not buying into this at all. And if Perry was to attempt to use this law for anything – the heads would start to fall all around him because he would then have to enforce this law to everyone else in that list – and the fallout across that stated would be horribly terrific in the end and you know it as well as I do. And at that point, maybe she could then file a lawsuit against him herself for failing to enforce the laws of the State of Texas? Does that sound familiar?

      • Charles Vincent

        First you can’t guarantee anything here.
        Second we aren’t talking about Ohio or any other state but Texas so your comments on your current state or it’s laws are irrelevant as they do not apply to Texas law.

        Again it’s irrelevant whether they have not been intoxicated while off duty, the fact is this DA got drunk( three times the legal limit) and drove. Furthermore she was apparently belligerent to the officer who stopped her and to the personnel who booked her into county jail, so much so they had to strap her in to a chair. Bottom line she broke the law and is subject to the Texas law I showed you period.
        The rest is hyperbole and more nonsense meant to obfuscate the topic.

      • iowasteve

        So then, you appear to support laws being applied only to certain people – correct? You are not going to tell me that no one who works for the cities or counties in Texas have ever been intoxicated and I’m sure I can include Rick Perry in this. If you are not saying this, then the law has not been equally enforced and that means that Rick Perry is not also in violation of enforcing state laws – and isn’t this what the House is accusing the President of right now??? As normal with republicans, laws are only meant for those they do not like or agree with – if you are friends, you can do whatever you want. Hell, most deputies and probably many Sheriffs go out drinking. That is in violation of the same law you want instituted against this person and simply because she is investigating your hero. Even Rick Perry isn’t stupid enough to open this can of worms and try to get rid of her using this stupid law that isn’t enforced anyway.

      • Charles Vincent

        For the sake of expediency I will reply to both posts here.

        So then, you appear to support laws being applied only to certain people – correct?

        No it applies to all people equally, although public servants wield more power than the average citizen and should be held to a higher standard of conduct, and punishment for violating the public trust and the law should be met with swift consequences.

        Regarding officials that drink.

        1) in the case of GWB its irrelevant until you can provide records of his DUI being during his terms in office.

        2) IN the case of them drinking off duty its irrelevant Unless they break the law IN this case get a DUI.

        3) being publicly intoxicated in terms of breaking the law Implies you are either a danger to yourself or to others i.e falling down drunk. the DA probably met both the falling down drunk and in the case of her DUI was 3 times the legal limit.

        “That is in violation of the same law you want instituted against this person and simply because she is investigating your hero.”

        This is well a gross assumption on your part, I don’t give a crap about Perry we are talking about the DA that broke the law.

        I will refer you to a salon article that called this indictment “shoddy” and damaging to the democratic party.

        http://www DOT salon DOT com/2014/08/19/the_rights_bombshell_deceit_why_the_lefts_defense_of_perry_reveals_so_much/

  • Gary Menten

    Rick Perry giving three reasons he’ll be acquitted.

    1. He’s the governor.
    2. He’s a Conservative Republican
    3. Oops! He forgot the third.

  • Jim Bean

    Reminds me of Obama appoint one of his big donors to investigate the IRS/TeaParty gate. Corruption is everywhere.

    • Pipercat

      It could rain Rice Krispies and it would remind you of Obama or something you perceive Obama has done.

      • STIPHLER…UR MOM’S BOYFRIEND

        IT NEVER FAILS…someone always have to bring forth old irrelevant scenario’s & try to point the attention toward OBAMA! Good one dude!!!!!!!!

      • Richard Desjardin

        More like pointing out that corruption is everywhere.

        Way to deflect when someone points out that corruption happens on both sides.

        Prick.

    • STIPHLER…UR MOM’S BOYFRIEND

      IT NEVER FAILS…someone always have to bring forth old irrelevant scenario’s & try to point the attention toward OBAMA! Good one dude!!!!

      • Jim Bean

        Sorry if I upset you. Its just that liberals get so gawd awfully offended at things (when a Pub does them) that they are just fine with when done by a Dem. I like to call attention to the hypocrisy in hopes that it adds perspective. What’s wrong with that?

      • Pipercat

        Nice try Jimbo, but what you’re doing is a fallacious attempt to divert attention away from the issue at hand. Feeling magnanimous, I’ll even tell you the fallacy you’re using: The fallacy of two wrongs making a right.

        I truly believe it’s impossible for you to make a stand alone argument. One that is not fallacious and one that stays on the issue being discussed.

        Do yourself a big favor, try and make an argument without using any comparison.

      • Jim Bean

        That would be a great help to you, wouldn’t it – if no one compared the standards you’re applying today to the ones you applied yesterday?

      • Pipercat

        Wouldn’t help me in the slightest. Fallacious arguments are fallacious past, present and future. Oh, that’s a false dilemma.

      • Jim Bean

        Oh, the bliss of self-imposed ignorance.

      • Pipercat

        Ad hominem.

  • rick224

    Most of us at one time in our lives got behind the wheel and drove home under the influence. Luckily in most cases we made it home safe. Remember that old adage …. people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones? I applaud Rosemary Lehmberg for accepting responsibility,fulfilling her sentence and treatment. Rick Perry is a corrupt politicians who feels he’s like John Gotti the teflon king.There has been rumors over the years of his shady dealings, I hope the Special Prosecutor follows through on the indictments and Rick Perry get’s what he so richly deserves ….. time behind bars in general population.

    • Richard Desjardin

      No most of us haven’t.

      Irresponsible people with poor judgement do.

      She should resign from her position, Perry shouldn’t have pushed the issue.

      /Thread.

      • iowasteve

        Then who would you have pick her replacement, because He certainly should not be involved in this or any of his aides. I do hope you agree with that one at least. But I’m still sure you voted for Bush for President – and the people of Florida voted “little Bush” for governor and his daughters were actively writing fake prescriptions to get drugs! Seems to me that Texas breeds corruption in politics – wait, it’s not Texas – it’s the GOP in general.

      • Jeremy Anderson

        I was just in a traffic class the other day and according to that officer you are wrong and most people who drink have indeed gotten behind the wheel when they were impaired. But hey, what does he know.

  • checkwolf

    “for abuse of power”???? Are they talking about OBAMA????

    • Pipercat

      No, Bigus Rickus….

      • lindylou

        Maybe if he got some really nerdy glasses it would help.

    • STIPHLER…UR MOM’S BOYFRIEND

      IT NEVER FAILS…someone always have to bring forth old irrelevant scenario’s & try to point the attention toward OBAMA! Good one dude!!!!!!

  • ME

    I’m just here to see if this get blamed on OBAMA too! lmao!

  • Charles Vincent

    Hmm so it’s bad to with hold funding if a demand isn’t met?
    Well then the federal government needs to face charges they do this sort of thing here are but two examples;
    1) the Feds threatened to with hold money for roads if states didn’t implement the 55 mph speed limit
    2) the federal government did the same thing to states over the legal drinking age I order to get the age to be 21. The hypocrisy of this one is astounding

    And the hypocrisy of the author of this article and many of the posters is equally astounding.

    • iowasteve

      First this is not actually the same thing – and many states still had some major highways set at 60 and 65 anyway, despite that. And as well, some states had two different drinking ages depending on the alcohol content. You may not be old enough to remember that. Ohio had two “levels” of beer – 3.2 percent and 6 percent. Never made much sense to me – but 18 yr olds could buy and drink 3.2, which were identified using red caps and pull tab on cans – but you needed to be 21 for the rest and liquor. The road funding issue was really stupid, because the feds were responsible for their own highways anyway and most states already were responsible for their own highways just as the cities and counties are responsible for their roads and streets. It seems to me that this is not even a close approximate to the same thing. Also, this woman I do not believe was a DA, she was a special prosecutor in the DAs office. Two different things – once again.

      • Michael Siever

        No, she is the DA.

      • Charles Vincent

        “Why is it when conservatives stand their ground, they’re heroes to Mr. Vincent, but when liberals do it, they’re arrogant?”
        It is dependent on the situation and whether or not laws have been broken. But the assumption on your part is well incorrect, way to show your ignorance

        “…with impunity and and could rake in hundreds of millions of dollars for Texans Republicans in just less than 3 years, should they be able to install one of their cronies into that DA position should she resign, hence why Perry pushed for it.”

        First thing here is that to my knowledge DA’s are elected officials so more than likely there would be a special election in that county to replace her, if she resigned and one of the assistant DA’s would fill in until a new one was elected.
        Your hyperbole is duly noted though.

      • Charles Vincent

        I am old enough to remember and the feds don’t give funding to the states that refused to comply in either case. I should have specified I meant state and county road funding. My Fault for thinking people could make that leap of logic.

    • mcc985

      libtard cult and hypocrisy are synonymous.

  • Stephen Barlow

    RICKY’S GOING TO JAY IL!!! RICKY’S GOING TO JAY IL!!!

  • Michael Siever

    Governors in other states (namely Illinois, and possibly Virginia, stay tuned) have gone to prison over the same things Perry is alleged of doing, such as racketeering, money laundering, bribery, etc. I guess it’s a good thing you can’t have “Prayer” without ” Perry”, because he’s going to need one!

  • victoria_29

    LOL you liberals can spin this anyway you want but I suggest you read the Texas Constitution. Rick was well within his rights as Governor. But hey we do appreciate all the free publicity nationally you are creating for Rick, it is gaining him national supporters. LMAO if you guys really want to worry about abuse of power you might want to look at Barry.

  • mcc985

    I wish Wen-Wen was governor. Then we could triple the budget for the “office of integrity” headed by the pretty vodka-swilling lush.

  • gwatson

    Lehmberg can be dismissed from her job for a DUI. It’s one of the reasons to do so. We have to understand if your job said these are the rules to work here then would you be allowed to break those rules and keep your job? I was just curious and looked all this up.