no bid contracts are simply a matter of Sales 101. Texas has mandatory competitive bidding laws for certain contracts for goods and services over $25,000 depending on the payment source, and there are criminal penalties for the hapless government official who knowingly violates these laws. There are, however, exceptions for emergencies.
Perry claimed the emergency exception when he approved the contracts in question but his public explanation of the emergency was sham. The Public Integrity Unit was investigating whether there was a violation of these laws when Perry vetoed their funding. If Perry knowing violated these laws, he is in big trouble for reasons outside of the present indictment. But if he actually threatened to veto and did veto the funding to stop the investigation, that will be enough to convict under the present indictment. We don’t know whether Perry is innocent here or his veto was pretextual or not – that is why there has to be a trial. But the special prosecutor spent weeks presenting evidence to the grand jury – and no one knows yet what that evidence was. There also were illegal no bid contracts award to companies tasked to investigate Medicare fraud. For all we know these contracts could also be part of the special prosecutor's evidence.And when a sole source contract is awarded, the snakes come out of the woodwork. Snakes being competitors, as well as the other side of the aisle to challenge the award.
This litigation is fairly common. What did selling at the state and local level teach me? It taught me to get the hell out of government sales and back to the commercial market. It's cleaner, upfront, and more legal (lol)
There is a better chance that your hero Roman Polanski will be extradited before Perry "goes down". Maybe you should finally reach out to GaG and go double nothing.
P.S. FCX closed at $19.27 today. Appears you spend as much time on issues like this as you do on your financial portfolio.
Now I’m really confused bc Jack, who was so impressed by the talking heads, told us last summer that the indictment was “already over.” Apparently Gov Perry does not think so and has told his lawyers to stop the indictment at any cost. And like good lawyers everywhere, they are only too happy to bill him – they have filed three separate motions to dismiss the indictment. The first one has already been denied. That’s a cool million for three briefs and one hearing. Nice work if you can get it. LOL.
But this week we learned that the no bid contracts Gov Perry granted for border security - to a firm that really was unqualified - were under investigation by the Public Integrity Unit until he exercised that veto. Gov Perry at the time told us there was no time to take bids bc there had been a bombing in El Paso. Only problem is, the bombing was actually in Mexico. Did the Governor exercise that veto to protect his ass? Sure sounds like an abuse of power to me.
I predict the million dollar motions to dismiss will both be denied bc the statutes are not unconstitutional on their face, and you can’t tell if they are unconstitutional “as applied” to Gov Perry until we have a trial. But Jack’s pundits say otherwise. An all star team of lawyers has filed an amicus brief urging dismissal. These guys, however, have no idea what the facts are that were presented to the grand jury.
Regardless, and best of all, that one million in atty fees was paid out of ….drum roll …campaign contributions. In other words, if you contribute to Perry’s presidential campaign, your money will actually be used to pay his lawyers. He’s already spent a million of his war chest without paying for a single ad. LOL. Let’s see how this affects his contributions.
Gov Perry is going down, and deservedly so.
even as the media reports that his veto of the Public Integrity Unit funding – purportedly bc the DA refused to resign - killed an investigation into no bid contracts granted by the Perry administration.
Now I’m really confused bc Jack, who was so impressed by the talking heads, told us last summer that the indictment was “already over.” Apparently Gov Perry does not think so and has told his lawyers to stop the indictment at any cost. And like good lawyers everywhere, they are only too happy to bill him – they have filed three separate motions to dismiss the indictment. The first one has already been denied. That’s a cool million for three briefs and one hearing. Nice work if you can get it. LOL.
But this week we learned that the no bid contracts Gov Perry granted for border security - to a firm that really was unqualified - were under investigation by the Public Integrity Unit until he exercised that veto. Gov Perry at the time told us there was no time to take bids bc there had been a bombing in El Paso. Only problem is, the bombing was actually in Mexico. Did the Governor exercise that veto to protect his ass? Sure sounds like an abuse of power to me.
I predict the million dollar motions to dismiss will both be denied bc the statutes are not unconstitutional on their face, and you can’t tell if they are unconstitutional “as applied” to Gov Perry until we have a trial. But Jack’s pundits say otherwise. An all star team of lawyers has filed an amicus brief urging dismissal. These guys, however, have no idea what the facts are that were presented to the grand jury.
Regardless, and best of all, that one million in atty fees was paid out of ….drum roll …campaign contributions. In other words, if you contribute to Perry’s presidential campaign, your money will actually be used to pay his lawyers. He’s already spent a million of his war chest without paying for a single ad. LOL. Let’s see how this affects his contributions.
Gov Perry is going down, and deservedly so
to get more money for legal fees.
He's so worried about the hot water he is in... That he is running for president!!! RAOFLMFAO! Boy, are you dumb...
particularly this one 
which I use often to connote wry humor!
Seriously, tell me you have more. I didn't realize you are such the expert on the no-bid procurement process within government contracting. First, you do realize no-bid contracting is done all the time at the state and local level in all states. I've done a couple of sole source contracts, and I might add, did an excellent job of convincing those that needed to be convinced, that the company I worked for was the ONLY company that could deliver the stated product/service in the required timeframe. It's called sales 101.
And when a sole source contract is awarded, the snakes come out of the woodwork. Snakes being competitors, as well as the other side of the aisle to challenge the award.
This litigation is fairly common. What did selling at the state and local level teach me? It taught me to get the hell out of government sales and back to the commercial market. It's cleaner, upfront, and more legal (lol)
There is a better chance that your hero Roman Polanski will be extradited before Perry "goes down". Maybe you should finally reach out to GaG and go double nothing.
P.S. FCX closed at $19.27 today. Appears you spend as much time on issues like this as you do on your financial portfolio.
Now I’m really confused bc Jack, who was so impressed by the talking heads, told us last summer that the indictment was “already over.” Apparently Gov Perry does not think so and has told his lawyers to stop the indictment at any cost. And like good lawyers everywhere, they are only too happy to bill him – they have filed three separate motions to dismiss the indictment. The first one has already been denied. That’s a cool million for three briefs and one hearing. Nice work if you can get it. LOL.
But this week we learned that the no bid contracts Gov Perry granted for border security - to a firm that really was unqualified - were under investigation by the Public Integrity Unit until he exercised that veto. Gov Perry at the time told us there was no time to take bids bc there had been a bombing in El Paso. Only problem is, the bombing was actually in Mexico. Did the Governor exercise that veto to protect his ass? Sure sounds like an abuse of power to me.
I predict the million dollar motions to dismiss will both be denied bc the statutes are not unconstitutional on their face, and you can’t tell if they are unconstitutional “as applied” to Gov Perry until we have a trial. But Jack’s pundits say otherwise. An all star team of lawyers has filed an amicus brief urging dismissal. These guys, however, have no idea what the facts are that were presented to the grand jury.
Regardless, and best of all, that one million in atty fees was paid out of ….drum roll …campaign contributions. In other words, if you contribute to Perry’s presidential campaign, your money will actually be used to pay his lawyers. He’s already spent a million of his war chest without paying for a single ad. LOL. Let’s see how this affects his contributions.
Gov Perry is going down, and deservedly so.
no bid contracts are simply a matter of Sales 101. Texas has mandatory competitive bidding laws for certain contracts for goods and services over $25,000 depending on the payment source, and there are criminal penalties for the hapless government official who knowingly violates these laws. There are, however, exceptions for emergencies.
Perry claimed the emergency exception when he approved the contracts in question but his public explanation of the emergency was sham. The Public Integrity Unit was investigating whether there was a violation of these laws when Perry vetoed their funding.
If Perry knowing violated these laws, he is in big trouble for reasons outside of the present indictment. But if he actually threatened to veto and did veto the funding to stop the investigation, that will be enough to convict under the present indictment.
We don’t know whether Perry is innocent here or his veto was pretextual or not – that is why there has to be a trial. But the special prosecutor spent weeks presenting evidence to the grand jury – and no one knows yet what that evidence was. There also were illegal no bid contracts award to companies tasked to investigate Medicare fraud. For all we know these contracts could also be part of the special prosecutor's evidence.
And when a sole source contract is awarded, the snakes come out of the woodwork. Snakes being competitors, as well as the other side of the aisle to challenge the award.
This litigation is fairly common. What did selling at the state and local level teach me? It taught me to get the hell out of government sales and back to the commercial market. It's cleaner, upfront, and more legal (lol)
There is a better chance that your hero Roman Polanski will be extradited before Perry "goes down". Maybe you should finally reach out to GaG and go double nothing.
P.S. FCX closed at $19.27 today. Appears you spend as much time on issues like this as you do on your financial portfolio.
Now I’m really confused bc Jack, who was so impressed by the talking heads, told us last summer that the indictment was “already over.” Apparently Gov Perry does not think so and has told his lawyers to stop the indictment at any cost. And like good lawyers everywhere, they are only too happy to bill him – they have filed three separate motions to dismiss the indictment. The first one has already been denied. That’s a cool million for three briefs and one hearing. Nice work if you can get it. LOL.
But this week we learned that the no bid contracts Gov Perry granted for border security - to a firm that really was unqualified - were under investigation by the Public Integrity Unit until he exercised that veto. Gov Perry at the time told us there was no time to take bids bc there had been a bombing in El Paso. Only problem is, the bombing was actually in Mexico. Did the Governor exercise that veto to protect his ass? Sure sounds like an abuse of power to me.
I predict the million dollar motions to dismiss will both be denied bc the statutes are not unconstitutional on their face, and you can’t tell if they are unconstitutional “as applied” to Gov Perry until we have a trial. But Jack’s pundits say otherwise. An all star team of lawyers has filed an amicus brief urging dismissal. These guys, however, have no idea what the facts are that were presented to the grand jury.
Regardless, and best of all, that one million in atty fees was paid out of ….drum roll …campaign contributions. In other words, if you contribute to Perry’s presidential campaign, your money will actually be used to pay his lawyers. He’s already spent a million of his war chest without paying for a single ad. LOL. Let’s see how this affects his contributions.
Gov Perry is going down, and deservedly so.
after all, you seem to have it all figured out, I would think that you would want all your research to pay off with some cold hard cash.
So how much do you want to wager? The betting windows are wide open and ready to take as much action as you care to lay
First, there is such a long history of the state (generic) paying for the defense of politicians, I can only say, "So."
Second. Obama just crossed into impeachment area.
The gist of the allegation against Perry is that he should not have threatened to veto the proposed legislation. Everyone - even the prosecution - recognizes that a governor (and President) has an absolute right too veto a law for any (or NO) reason. An exec does not even have to give a reason.
But they say he should not have threatened to do so, only just do it.
Now it turns out Obama has threatened to veto Keystone, repeal ObamaCare and all sorts of things. He seems to have just crossed the law.
NOW to be serious, I don't think Obama did anything wrong, but he has been threatening to veto bills.
Or maybe Obama has become Perry
Now I’m really confused bc Jack, who was so impressed by the talking heads, told us last summer that the indictment was “already over.” Apparently Gov Perry does not think so and has told his lawyers to stop the indictment at any cost. And like good lawyers everywhere, they are only too happy to bill him – they have filed three separate motions to dismiss the indictment. The first one has already been denied. That’s a cool million for three briefs and one hearing. Nice work if you can get it. LOL.
But this week we learned that the no bid contracts Gov Perry granted for border security - to a firm that really was unqualified - were under investigation by the Public Integrity Unit until he exercised that veto. Gov Perry at the time told us there was no time to take bids bc there had been a bombing in El Paso. Only problem is, the bombing was actually in Mexico. Did the Governor exercise that veto to protect his ass? Sure sounds like an abuse of power to me.
I predict the million dollar motions to dismiss will both be denied bc the statutes are not unconstitutional on their face, and you can’t tell if they are unconstitutional “as applied” to Gov Perry until we have a trial. But Jack’s pundits say otherwise. An all star team of lawyers has filed an amicus brief urging dismissal. These guys, however, have no idea what the facts are that were presented to the grand jury.
Regardless, and best of all, that one million in atty fees was paid out of ….drum roll …campaign contributions. In other words, if you contribute to Perry’s presidential campaign, your money will actually be used to pay his lawyers. He’s already spent a million of his war chest without paying for a single ad. LOL. Let’s see how this affects his contributions.
Gov Perry is going down, and deservedly so.
and the “abuse of official capacity.” There are no comparable federal laws. That is why Mr. Obama has NOT broken the law by either threatening to veto the Republicans’ dastardly bills or actually doing so.
The criminal complaint against Perry was actually filed BEFORE he vetoed the funding. He threatened to veto the Public Integrity Unit’s funding – which had already been appropriated by the legislature – unless the DA resigned.
Perry claims he threatened to veto and did veto the funding bc the Democratic DA had a DUI. But three other Republican DAs had DUIs during his administration and Perry did nothing.
Now let’s suppose the media assumption is correct – the DA's DUI was a pretext for the threat and veto – the real reason was the Public Integrity Unit’s investigation of the no bid contracts Perry had awarded which would have been an independent crime. Perry had to stop them from exposing his crime.
Do you think the “absolute veto power” would protect Perry from violating the abuse of official capacity statute, and that the First Amendment protects Perry from the threats made to coerce the public servant?
Remember, the First Amendment does not protect against criminal conduct
There are some exec powers that cannot be questioned. They are absolute. Reason doesn't mattrer.
That corrupt pardon that Gov. Shwartzenger gave his buddies kid and the Cliinton pardon of Rich (if memorry serves) stunk to hell, but were valid and can't be questioned.
Vetos are the same. Furthhermore, the exec can always say, "I am going to do X."
There is nothing wrong with indicating further action. On federal, state, or city level.
In fact, a person can say "I am going to steal something," but until he does it it is not a crime. (Handful of exceptions. Maybe "I will kill you" is a crime if a serious threat, but murder is diff than veto.)
Perry cannot threaten to break a public officials neck, but he can threaten to do anythiong within his llegal power.
The criminal complaint against Perry was actually filed BEFORE he vetoed the funding. He threatened to veto the Public Integrity Unit’s funding – which had already been appropriated by the legislature – unless the DA resigned.
Perry claims he threatened to veto and did veto the funding bc the Democratic DA had a DUI. But three other Republican DAs had DUIs during his administration and Perry did nothing.
Now let’s suppose the media assumption is correct – the DA's DUI was a pretext for the threat and veto – the real reason was the Public Integrity Unit’s investigation of the no bid contracts Perry had awarded which would have been an independent crime. Perry had to stop them from exposing his crime.
Do you think the “absolute veto power” would protect Perry from violating the abuse of official capacity statute, and that the First Amendment protects Perry from the threats made to coerce the public servant?
Remember, the First Amendment does not protect against criminal conduct.
Would Arnold be making crappy movies, or be in jail? I think you will agree he would be in jail.
The pardon power is not “absolute” as you suggest. If the governor violates other criminal laws in executing the pardon, he goes to jail. And in fact when the judge upheld the commutation, he said it was not “illegal “ under Marcy’s law or any other California law. If the power was absolute, he would not have needed to address this.
Same with the veto power.
This what the Special Prosecutor contends in the Perry case – Perry violated other Texas criminal laws given the circumstances in which he made his threat and then exercised the veto.
But you are in good company – the all star team of lawyers also seeks to frame the case as simply an exercise of the veto power and First Amendment rights.
I say they are wrong
as a matter of fact, you keep "stating" it as if it were a matter of fact and not opinion.
BUT, you not only refuse to put your money where your mouth is, you won't even acknowledge my many posts asking you to "put up or shut up"
Are you really that scared of a friendly wager?