Alternate Reality: Ken Paxton and the Far-Right's Unending Deception

Former Texas state representative Jonathan Stickland has made appearances on Steve Bannon's show, using the platform to disseminate a series of claims and statements that have raised concerns about their accuracy and intent. Stickland's statements on the impeachment proceedings against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and the Department of Justice's handling of certain cases, have sparked controversy and prompted a critical examination of their veracity.

Scorecard Confessions conducted an extensive review of Stickland's recent interview with Bannon, revealing falsehoods and misrepresentations in nearly every statement made by Stickland. In the sections below, we offer the intentionally omitted context to rectify the deceptive claims propagated by one of the principal spokespersons of The Enterprise.

"The entire media narrative down here, it's been so bad for the Bush regime that they've now started to change the goalposts. In the last 24 hours, we've seen witnesses come up with no proof. They cannot say that there was a crime actually committed.

Under the Texas Constitution, a crime does not have to be committed in order to impeach an Attorney General or any other state official. Impeachment in Texas, like in many other states, is a political process rather than a criminal one.

The specific grounds for impeachment are not limited to the commission of a crime. While criminal conduct could potentially be the basis for impeachment if it is deemed to constitute misconduct or abuse of power, other actions or behaviors inconsistent with the duties and responsibilities of the office can also lead to impeachment proceedings.

"I think people the grassroots here in Texas, they're really upset. They've had a hero in Ken Paxton who's been fighting these guys for years. Millions of Texans went and voted for Ken Paxton and said, that is our guy. We see people come in and try and take that away from them, and they're picked off. And this lack of evidence, this lack of good witnesses, they're fired up."

Stickland's assessment seems to contradict reality, as several reporters even amongst the far-right have claimed the grassroots support of Paxton during impeachment is anemic, perhaps even revolting in key strongholds for The Enterprise.

What I'm hearing from folks is that Dan Patrick is starting to get annoyed

"What I've been hearing is that Dan Patrick appears to be growing increasingly frustrated." This suggests that Stickland may have some information about Dan Patrick's demeanor regarding the impeachment proceedings. So far, Patrick has remained steadfast in adhering to Senate rules and has refrained from engaging with jurors. In fact, when the possibility of Patrick "back-channeling" to Senators was raised, he responded assertively.

Stickland's insinuation could imply that Patrick is either involved in ex parte communications with Senators or individuals accessible to Stickland. It raises the question of whether the $3,000,000 served as a means to gain insights into the ongoing case.

And you can see that even in the rulings. Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick kind of switching tones and doing things on the stand like saying answer yes or no to the witnesses, which has put them in a very bad spot.

Stickland appears to be making a misleading suggestion that Patrick's frustration is driving him to insist that witnesses respond with a simple 'Yes' or 'No,' when, in reality, Patrick is only urging witnesses to do so in response to requests from either Paxton's defense or prosecution attorneys.

I think the only way that the Bush regime and the globalists are able to turn this thing around is if they can get to the specific senators. Because if these senators actually look at the evidence and the case before them, there is no way that Ken Paxton should be impeached.

Stickland's response, as reported in Scorecard Confessions on multiple occasions, appears to be a case of him projecting his own behavior onto others. Leading up to and during the impeachment proceedings, it is alleged that Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies has engaged in the following actions:

• Attempting to influence members of the grand jury in the Texas House.
• Trying to manipulate jurors both before and during the impeachment trial, using tactics such as paying for fake tweets of support, attempting to intimidate members of both the grand and trial juries, sending text messages that potentially violate basic disclosure laws, and paying a substantial sum of $3,000,000 to the judge presiding over the trial.

It's important to note that Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies has not provided any evidence of similar misconduct by their opponents, despite being asked to do so, and has consistently refused to do so.

We need to keep the pressure up. And not only that, Steve, we're going to have to turn this around. On the flip side of this, if Ken Paxton is freed and these charges do not go through when he is reinstalled as the Attorney General of Texas, then we need to go after every single one of these guys.

It appears that Stickland's current stance, wherein he is threatening to utilize Ken Paxton and potentially weaponize the Texas Attorney General's office, contradicts the previous position taken by The Enterprise. This shift in position raises questions about the consistency and alignment of Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies views, particularly in light of their claimed opposition to similar actions at the federal level.

I mean, look, Steve, at the end of the day, you have a situation where these so called whistleblowers who are now looking much more like people who are leading an insurrection in the Attorney general's office.

Stickland's assertion of a plot involving an insurrection appears to be an attempt to project the actions of members of the Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies onto others. It's worth noting that Ken Paxton's involvement in the events of January 6th, which is known to have been a violent insurrection, raises questions about his role in that incident. Additionally, there have been allegations that certain individuals within The Enterprise network provided financial support, coordination, and support for the January 6th events.

They went to the FBI, the deep state FBI. They went to the Biden, department of justice and took them. All of this evidence, all of this stuff, they did nothing with it. If you don't think that the deep state FBI and the Biden DOJ would have gone after Ken Paxton with just the little smallest thing, they've done nothing.

This statement is false. The whistleblowers approached the DOJ on September 30, 2020, during President Donald Trump's administration, not during President Joe Biden's term, which began on January 20, 2021.

Furthermore, it would be premature to assert that the DOJ has taken no action. Nate Paul was arrested on charges related to the Paxton impeachment on June 8, 2023, nearly three years after the whistleblowers first contacted the DOJ.

Additionally, it's worth noting that a grand jury was seated on August 10, 2023 to investigate Ken Paxton's actions in relation to the Nate Paul case. The outcome of the Paxton grand jury proceedings remains unknown at this time.

The factual timeline discredits Stickland's conspiracy theory on its face.

Stickland brings up a great point, because in the weaponized DOJ remember one of the reasons they hate him at the federal level, Paxton actually put together one of the most coherent arguments in the steal of the 2020 election. Now it's not taken up by the Supreme Court. He went right there. That's where they hated him from the absolute beginning.

Paxton's lawsuit in the 2020 election has indeed been characterized as "preposterous," "making a mockery of federalism and separation of powers," and "procedurally and substantively defective." Additionally, it has been suggested that the lawsuit was submitted by someone "begging for a pardon."

As a result of the 2020 election lawsuit, an ethics complaint was filed with the Texas State Bar against Paxton.

The big case that the attorney general, Ken Paxton was working on when these guys went to the FBI, was going after Google. We were literally going after Google... That's who Ken Paxton was going after when all of this started. That's what kickstarted it's insane.

The initial probe into Google began in September 2019, with the involvement of Paxton and 49 other state attorneys general.

From the New York Times:

Letitia James, the Democratic attorney general of New York, announced on Friday that a bipartisan group was investigating Facebook.

A couple of noteworthy points:

• It is interesting to observe that Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies has not criticized Ken Paxton for collaborating with Democrats in the investigation of Google. This is peculiar considering The Enterprise's strong opposition to working with Democrats. The absence of criticism in this case raises questions about their consistency in principles and alliances.
• Notably, Ken Paxton is the only Attorney General involved in the probe who has been impeached or accused of similar crimes as the suspended Texas Attorney General. This unique situation raises concerns about Paxton's position and the potential implications of his impeachment or alleged misconduct in comparison to his counterparts.

Ken Paxton, The Enterprise, and the Truth They Don't Want You to Know

It's important to note that Ken Paxton officially initiated legal action against Google in December 2020 when he filed a lawsuit regarding digital ad practices. This lawsuit was filed three months after the whistleblowers went to the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding Paxton's conduct and before Joe Biden assumed the presidency. The timing of these events provides a chronological context for Paxton's legal actions related to Google and the whistleblowers' interactions with the DOJ.

In examining the various statements and claims made by individuals aligned with Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies, their pattern of deception and manipulation re-emerges. These tactics are aimed at shaping a narrative that serves their interests, even if it involves distorting facts and ignoring constitutional and legal principles.

Firstly, there is a blatant misrepresentation of the impeachment process in Texas. Impeachment, according to the Texas Constitution, does not require the commission of a crime. Instead, it is a political process, and grounds for impeachment extend beyond criminal conduct. This misrepresentation raises questions about their commitment to accuracy and transparency.

Furthermore, the attempt to portray Ken Paxton's impeachment as unjust is contradicted by the ethical and legal concerns surrounding his actions, as well as the involvement of multiple state attorneys general in investigating Google, a point that is conspicuously omitted by the Axis of Allies. This includes Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies position in favor of a false theory overwhelmingly rejected by the Texas Senate, known as the forgiveness doctrine.

The tactics employed by Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies also include projecting their own actions onto others and making baseless accusations, as seen in the insinuation of an "insurrection" and unfounded allegations about the Department of Justice's actions.

Additionally, their selective criticism and silence on certain issues, such as Ken Paxton's collaboration with Democrats in investigating Google, raise questions about their consistency and motives.

In conclusion, these tactics employed by Texas Scorecard's Axis of Allies appear to be aimed at manipulating public opinion and advancing their own agenda, even at the expense of factual accuracy and principled consistency. Vigilance and a critical examination of their claims are essential to understanding the complex political landscape they seek to shape.