Since O'Connor does not cite who these DAs are, hard to check easily, but in any case, in Lehmberg's case Perry had the power to act because she was head of a state-funded function, the PIU. That was something he had direct control over. He had to take a stand one way of the other -- either approve the funding and tacitly endorse a convicted DUI offender as head of Public Integrity Unit, or block it. Were she purely a county-level prosecutor, he would have no role in this.RetNavy wrote:Gary O’Connor of Powderly
To the Editor:
...
Perry and his apologists characterize the indictment as purely political and tied to Perry’s call for the Travis County DA to resign following her conviction for DUI. While I do not condone Lemberg’s drunk driving or subsequent behavior, the fact remains that Perry was silent about DUI convictions of two Republican DA’s, one of whom has two DUI convictions.
Several sly misrepresentations here:RetNavy wrote:Gary O’Connor of Powderly
To the Editor:
...
Secondly, when the complaint that resulted in the investigation of Perry’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute was filed by Texans for Public Justice with the Travis County DA’s office, Lemberg recused herself and her entire office and declined to investigate. In fact a Republican judge from another county impaneled the grand jury which didn’t know the case they would consider, and appointed a non-partisan special prosecutor, also from another county.
The bottom line is that Lemberg’s office had nothing to do with the investigation, hardly the political retaliation promoted by Perry’s defenders.
Perry and has cronies have a history of questionable deals that benefit his major contributors ranging from attempting to require a specific vaccination for all Texas female teenagers to increased state mandated testing to the shady dealing with the cancer research center that funneled millions to a Perry contributor with little or no oversight or results.
The CPRIT was a product a statewide vote to amend the Texas Constitution to establish it, and was voted into existence by Texas voters. It is not "Perry's".
By virtue of the legislation that set it up, the Governor appoints the board members. Since it was brand new, obviously Perry appointed all the board members. Lehmberg herself, and the primary investigator (who was indeed from Lehmberg's PIU office) both stated that at no time was Perry, the Governor's office, nor any of the board members appointed by Perry under any suspicion. The only ones investigated were the professional hired staff of CPRIT, and the only one indicted was a professional staff member. Nor, for that matter, was the company mentioned in the investigation (alleged to be Perry donors) aware that its proposal was improperly vetted by CPRIT; it was not under suspicion either.
Despite this, it was the Mo Elleithee, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, who alleged in an email that Perry was retaliating for an investigation in which neither he nor anyone associated with him was under investigation. Of course Mo left out that last part. I think I linked earlier in this thread to an Austin Statesman article that neatly torpedoed Elleithee's (and O'Connor's) claim. O'Connor, in his letter above, completely turns this around and attributes it to Perry supporters claiming some kind of retaliation over the CPRIT investigation.
Further, O'Connor asserts that "the complaint that resulted in the investigation of Perry’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute was filed by Texans for Public Justice with the Travis County DA’s office, Lemberg recused herself and her entire office and declined to investigate." This is nonsense. I don't know who initially filed a complaint, but Lehmberg's Public Integrity Unit did indeed investigate, resulting in a Travis County Grand Jury indicting one person, a professional staff member of CPRIT. And, as noted earlier, neither Perry or anyone associated with him was under investigation.
I suspect that if Lehmberg or McCrum realize this, they might direct one of the DA's investigators to do it.