Mediaboss Marketing

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

A Texas House candidate and police officer backed by former President Donald Trump and top Texas Republicans has been indicted on a charge of impersonating a public servant, according to authorities.

Dallas police said Friday that Frederick Frazier was placed on administrative leave after the department was notified that a Collin County grand jury indicted him. Impersonating a public servant is a third-degree felony.

Frazier turned himself in to the Richardson jail Friday and posted bond, said Teddy Yoshida, a spokesperson for the Richardson Police Department.

It is unclear what the specific allegations against Frazier are, and a spokesperson for the Collin County district attorneys office was not immediately available for comment.

Responding to the indictment, Fraziers campaign blamed his Republican primary runoff opponent, Paul Chabot, who had suggested Frazier posed as a city code compliance officer to get Chabots campaign signs taken down at a Walmart. In a statement, Fraziers campaign said Chabot, who has run for office multiple times before, is trying to overturn the results of that election by bringing up trumped complaints to law enforcement and testifying before a grand jury.

Frederick Frazier is looking forward to having the opportunity to defend himself in court, where we are confident jurors will see through Chabots lies in the same way that voters have five times before, the statement said.

John Thomas, Chabots consultant, issued a statement on Fraziers indictment:

An independent grand jury was empaneled and determined that Mr. Frazier committed multiple felonies. In fact, it was the Rangers and the McKinney PD who uncovered the felonies. Fraziers lying and deceit knows no limits. He committed crimes and refuses to fess up. He is a disgrace to himself and to those who dawn a badge in law enforcement. Paul Chabot demands Frazier have one shred of decency and immediately drop out of the race as its crucial that both a Republican and candidate with integrity represent the people of the 61st district.

Frazier easily won the Republican primary runoff last month for House District 61, an open seat in Collin County that leans Republican. A well-known advocate for law enforcement in Austin, Frazier had the backing of Trump, Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and state House Speaker Dade Phelan. The Democratic nominee in the race is Sheena King.

During the runoff, Chabot spoke out about the alleged theft of dozens of his campaign signs. In one incident, Chabot said a Walmart store manager told him someone claiming to work for city code compliance came in and told the store to take down Chabots signs because they were illegally placed. Chabot said he reported that to the police.

The Texas Rangers ultimately looked into his claims. Chabot later obtained a report from the Rangers through a public records request that said the agency investigated Frazier in February for alleged criminal violations of Impersonating a Public Servant and potentially related Theft.

At the time, Fraziers campaign consultant, Craig Murphy, said his candidate denied any wrongdoing and called Chabots claims frivolous.

Texas Scorecard and Steven Monacelli, a freelance journalist who extensively covered the campaign sign controversy for Rolling Stone, were among the first to report Friday that Frazier had been indicted.

Join us Sept. 22-24 in person in downtown Austin for The Texas Tribune Festival and experience 100+ conversation events featuring big names you know and others you should from the worlds of politics, public policy, the media and tech all curated by The Texas Tribunes award-winning journalists. Buy tickets.

Here is the original post:
Republican Texas House candidate in Collin County charged with impersonating public servant - The Texas Tribune

Mayra Flores was sworn in as the first Mexican-born member of Congress this week. And she did it as a Republican running in a Texas district that has only ever elected Democrats.

Flores, a 30-something mother of four, told me she was brought up with strong conservative values that focused on faith, family and hard work.

She won nearly 51% of the vote against her Democratic opponents 43% in the special election to replace Democrat Filemon Vela, who retired before his term ended.

She even earned the vote of Texas transplant and billionaire Elon Musk, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO, who revealed on Twitter he had just made his first-ever vote for a Republican candidate:I voted for Mayra Flores first time I ever voted Republican. Massive red wave in 2022.

Flores will serve out the remainder of Velas term and must face Democratic nominee Vicente Gonzalez in Novembers general election to keep the seat. While her initial term will be short-lived (and she has a tough fight ahead of her in the general), her victory signifies the growing shift of Hispanic voters connecting with a more conservative message.

The voters in Flores34thcongressional district are 84.5% Hispanic. Flores, who hails from the northeastern state of Tamaulipas, Mexico, and came to the US legally with her family when she was six years old, is a respiratory care worker and the wife of a border patrol agent. Her campaign never shied away from the issue of border security and her belief that everyone can earn the American Dream.

People want you to understand the things that are really impacting their lives, like inflation, education policies, the border crisis, which is literally in our backyard, escalating crime and the drug crisis, said Flores in an interview with The Post.

We need a legal immigration system that works not what we have going on here everyday in the district, she said of the flood of migrants entering the southern border daily.

Flores said she got involved with her local Republican party several years ago when she realized she lined up with their views on faith, education and border security.

She said Hispanic voters see themselves as Americans, while Democrats see Hispanic voters as an ethnic voting bloc. Because of that they felt entitled to our vote, Flores said. The problem is they do not represent our values of faith, community, work ethic or the desire to seek better opportunities.

Although Flores Rio Grande Valley district has been controlled by the Democrats for more than a century, the partys support here is steadily beginning to erode. While Obama won here by a whopping 22.1% just 10 years ago, Biden took it by just 4.2%.

Cameron County which is 85 percent Hispanic and located on the border has swung 14.3 percentage points toward Republicans in less than two years. Biden took that county by 13.2 percentage points; Flores won it by 1.1%.

Flores remarkable victory is reminiscent of the 2010 red wave, when Republican House candidates in the Rust Belt states of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania swept seats that Democrats had held for generations. The media and the Democratic Party never expected Hispanics to vote Republican in the same way they never expected legacy blue-collar Democrats to flip parties in the 2010 and 2014 midterms. But they did.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Democrats have taken these voters for granted. They always believed they were entitled to their vote in the same way they believed for years they were entitled to the working class white vote, but when you stop talking to voters about things they care about kitchen table issues like inflation, crime, the cost of gas or utilities and securing the border you lose them, he said.

While Flores was talking about those issues in the closing days of the election, her opponent was running on [the Capitol riot of] January 6. That showed how out of touch Democrats are in understanding what people are worried about right now, McCarthy said.

Flores victory is part of a larger trend in states with high Hispanic populations where Republicans are bagging local races. Last year the GOP took two heavily Hispanic mayoral races in Texas. Javier Villalobos defeated a Democrat-backed candidate in the border city of McAllen, while Mattie Parker bested a Democrat in Fort Worth who had endorsements from Beto ORourke and Julin Castro, both of whom ran for president in 2020.

When Flores faces Gonzalez in November, the newly drawn lines of the 34thdistrict will favor Democrats. But she said she is undaunted by that challenge.

Nothing is impossible when you work hard. We have it in us and were going to work really hard to earn everyones votes. And Im confident that were going to win that reelection in November because no one will be able to outwork us, she said.

Flores said she was honored to earn not just Musks vote but the support of everyone who has sent her to the US Capitol. Now, she wants to be their voice in Washington.

Prior to me running, no one really cared about what Texas district 34 had to say, she said.

I ran because I wanted to give back to this amazing country thats given me so much. Ive accomplished the American dream and I just want all our children to also accomplish the American dream. I ran because I didnt want that to slip away. I won because people heard that in me.

When I get to congress my job is supposed to focus on the issues that matter to my constituents, not whats important to people in Washington, DC.

Original post:
Why Mexican-born Rep. Mayra Flores is the future of the Republican party - New York Post

Former President Donald Trump has railed against the January 6 panel's public hearings.Chet Strange/Getty Images

Frank Luntz, a GOP pollster, told CNN that Trump is "paying a price" over the January 6 hearings.

He added that Trump can "send out his emails," but they're "having less and less of an impact."

Luntz also commented on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, calling him "more than a threat" to Trump.

Conservative pollster Frank Luntz said this week that he thinks former President Donald Trump's popularity is being damaged by the January 6 panel's public hearings on the Capitol riot.

Speaking on CNN's New Day program, Luntz said the panel focused "too much" on politicians but commented that the hearings are still hurting Trump.

"Donald Trump is actually paying a price for what these hearings are showing. So it's having an impact, even among Republicans," Luntz said.

He also commented on the public hearings not providing enough visual material of the actual riot.

"And in the end, the American people react to the visuals, not just the verbal, not just the conversation, and it is those visuals that proved to them that something really awful happened on January 6," he added.

Luntz also told CNN that polling in New Hampshire showed that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is ahead of Trump in the state.

"Ron DeSantis is actually ahead of Donald Trump in a very credible survey. Trump's numbers are actually falling. And that is what's changing the dynamic here," Luntz said, adding that these changing impressions might influence whether Trump eventually runs for president again in 2024.

Asked about how DeSantis might fare in 2024, Luntz told CNN that the Florida governor was now "more than a threat" to Trump. Luntz highlighted that DeSantis had been proving himself and giving Republicans an opportunity to say that "it's time to move on" from Trump.

"Make no mistake, Donald Trump is the most popular political figure within the Republican Party, but there is now a specific challenger," Luntz said. "And Trump can yell and scream and send out his emails, I'm on his list, and they're all emotional, and they all are meant to blow things up, but they're having less and less of an impact with every single month."

Story continues

Luntz has openly criticized Trump on several occasions. For instance, in May last year, Luntz said Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud might cost the GOP the House in 2022. In April, Luntz revealed that Republican lawmakers were privately "laughing at" Trump behind his back because they think of him as a "child."

Meanwhile, Trump has railed against the January 6 panel's public hearings, demanding equal airtime on national TV and releasing a 12-page statement bashing the investigation while continuing to tout his baseless claims of voter fraud.

Read the original article on Business Insider

See more here:
Top GOP pollster says Trump is 'paying a price' even among Republicans for what the January 6 hearings have revealed - Yahoo! Voices

Follow live updates on the House committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

WASHINGTON The four hearings held in the past few weeks by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack, with their clear, uninterrupted narratives about President Donald J. Trumps effort to undercut the peaceful transfer of power, have left some pro-Trump Republicans wringing their hands with regret about a decision made nearly a year ago.

Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader, chose last summer to withdraw all of his nominees to the committee amid a dispute with Speaker Nancy Pelosi over her rejection of his first two choices a turning point that left the nine-member investigative committee without a single ally of Mr. Trump.

Mostly in private, Republicans loyal to Mr. Trump have complained for months that they have no insight into the inner workings of the committee as it has issued dozens of subpoenas and conducted interviews behind closed doors with hundreds of witnesses.

But the public display this month of what the panel has learned including damning evidence against Mr. Trump and his allies left some Republicans wishing more vocally that Mr. Trump had strong defenders on the panel to try to counter the evidence its investigators dig up.

Would it have made for a totally different debate? Absolutely, said Representative Brian Mast, Republican of Florida. I would have defended the hell out of him.

Among those second-guessing Mr. McCarthys choice has been Mr. Trump.

Unfortunately, a bad decision was made, Mr. Trump told the conservative radio host Wayne Allyn Root this week. He added: It was a bad decision not to have representation on that committee. That was a very, very foolish decision.

The committee employed more than a dozen former federal prosecutors to investigate the actions of Mr. Trump and his allies in the buildup to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

With former television producers on staff, the committee has built a narrative told in chapters about the former presidents attempts to cling to power.

As it has done so, the committee has not had to contend with speechifying from the dais about Mr. Trumps conservative policy achievements. There has been no cross-examination of the panels witnesses. No derailing of the hearings with criticism of President Biden. No steering the investigation away from the former president. Ultimately, there has been no defense of Mr. Trump at all.

The committee presented considerable evidence this month of Mr. Trumps role, laying out how the former president pressured Vice President Mike Pence to go along with a plan to unilaterally overturn his election defeat even after he was told it was illegal.

On Tuesday, the panel directly tied Mr. Trump to a scheme to put forward fake slates of pro-Trump electors and presented fresh details of how the former president sought to bully, cajole and bluff his way into invalidating his 2020 defeat in states around the country.

The committee has also used prominent Republicans as witnesses to make its case, leaving Mr. Trumps allies with an impossible task: How are they to defend him even from the outside when the evidence against him comes from Republican lawyers, a widely respected conservative judge, his campaign advisers and even his own daughter?

The effectiveness of the hearings in putting Mr. Trump at the heart of the effort to overturn the election results has drawn the attention of, among others, Mr. Trump. He has made plain this week that he wants more Republicans defending him, and is displeased as the hearings play out on national television without pro-Trump voices.

The only Republicans on the committee are two who have lined up squarely against Mr. Trump: Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois. They were appointed by Ms. Pelosi, not Mr. McCarthy.

Mr. McCarthy figured in July that it was better politically to bash the committee from the sidelines rather than appoint members of his party acceptable to Ms. Pelosi. He has said he had to take a stand after she rejected two of his top picks for the panel: Representatives Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio.

Ms. Pelosi said she could not allow the pair to take part, based on their actions around the riot and comments they had made undercutting the investigation. (Mr. Jordan has subsequently been issued a subpoena by the committee because of his close dealings with Mr. Trump.) The speakers decision led directly to Mr. McCarthys announcement that Republicans would boycott the panel.

When Pelosi wrongfully didnt allow them, we shouldve picked other people, Mr. Trump said in an interview with Punchbowl News. We have a lot of good people in the Republican Party.

Mr. Trump has grumbled openly about the makeup of the panel, according to a person familiar with his remarks. Some members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus have also privately complained about the lack of pro-Trump Republicans on the panel, the person said.

Those close to Mr. McCarthy argue that the Democrats who control the committee would most likely not have allowed his nominees much power or influence over the panels work.

The hearings will pick up again on Thursday with a session devoted to Mr. Trumps effort to install a loyalist at the top of the Justice Department to carry out his demands for more investigations into baseless claims of election fraud.

The panel is planning at least two more hearings for July, according to its chairman, Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi. Those hearings are expected to detail how a mob of violent extremists attacked the Capitol and how Mr. Trump did nothing to call off the violence for more than three hours.

Asked on Tuesday about the former presidents comments about the Jan. 6 committee, Mr. McCarthy instead talked about inflation and gas prices.

They focused on an issue the public is not focused on, he said of the committee. Mr. McCarthy added that he spoke with Mr. Trump this week.

One of the Republicans whose nomination Mr. McCarthy withdrew from the committee, Representative Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota, was a defense lawyer before being elected to Congress.

Ms. Pelosi had approved of Mr. Armstrong serving on the panel, along with Representative Rodney Davis of Illinois and Representative Troy Nehls of Texas.

Mr. Armstrong said he had watched the hearings as the committee laid out evidence in a choreographed, well-scripted way.

Had he been allowed to serve on the committee, he would have tried to steer the investigation and its questions at public hearings into security failures at the Capitol, he said, echoing a line of criticism that many Republicans have tried to direct at Ms. Pelosi.

It would be a lot less scripted. Wed ask questions, Mr. Armstrong said. There are real questions to be answered. My heart goes out to the law enforcement officials. They needed more people down there.

Still, he said, he stands by the decision made by Mr. McCarthy, who is considered the leading candidate to become speaker if Republicans win control of the House in the midterm elections in November.

I was in the room when we made that decision, and I still think it was the right decision, he said, arguing that House Republicans had to take a stand after Ms. Pelosi removed Mr. Jordan and Mr. Banks. I think it was the only option.

Mr. Trumps comments have sparked much discussion among House Republicans over whether it was the right decision.

Everybodys got a different opinion on that, said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma. Personally, I think the leader made the right call. The minute the speaker decides who the Republican members are, it turned against the legitimacy of it.

Representative Daniel Crenshaw, Republican of Texas, said he would have preferred to see an exchange of opposing views on the panel. Let the public see how that debate goes, he said. That would have been better, of course.

But Representative Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican who voted to impeach Mr. Trump for inciting the attack on the Capitol and is retiring from Congress, said he saw nothing but hypocrisy and foolishness in Mr. Trumps complaints. He noted that Mr. Trump made the strategic error of opposing a bipartisan commission, with no current lawmakers involved, to investigate the attack on the Capitol.

That commission would have had to finish its work last year. Instead, Mr. Trumps miscalculation led to the creation of the House Jan. 6 committee, which is continuing to investigate him, Mr. Upton said.

Trump opposed the bipartisan commission, Mr. Upton said. Once again, hes rewriting history.

Stephanie Lai contributed reporting.

Originally posted here:
Why Some Republicans Are Second-Guessing Boycotting the Jan. 6 Panel - The New York Times

The flurry of pardon requests followed what the select committee showed was weeks of efforts by Trumps top congressional Republican defenders to spread misinformation about the results of the 2020 election. Those GOP lawmakers also helped apply pressure on the Justice Department to legitimize those false fraud claims. None of the lawmakers ever received pardons.

At an earlier hearing, the Jan. 6 panel showed an email from attorney John Eastman, one of the key architects of Trumps bid to stay in power, asking to be placed on Trumps pardon list. He, too, never received a pardon.

Later Thursday, several of the House Republicans vigorously denied asking for pardons for themselves. Gohmert said in a statement he asked for pardons for other people unrelated to Jan. 6. Perry issued his own statement reiterating his denial that he asked for a pardon: I stand by my statement that I never sought a Presidential pardon for myself or other Members of Congress.

Biggs wrote on Twitter the allegations were false. Jordan said he never requested a pardon but declined to say whether he ever asked for a status update.

Other Republicans criticized the committee but didnt directly deny the allegations. Greene, in a tweet, accused the committee of relying on hearsay, saying Hutchinson testified she heard about a pardon request, though she refused repeated questions from reporters on whether she ever asked for one.

Gaetz, in a tweet, simply criticized the select panel; he ignored questions late Thursday about the evidence he asked for a pardon.

Brooks, on other hand, said in a statement that the email request says it all, citing concerns that Democrats would prosecute or jail Republicans for their objections to certifying the electoral votes.

The Alabama Republican told reporters that Trump asked him to put his pardon request in writing so it can be evaluated following a post-Jan. 6 conversation and that after he sent his email, the president thought it would be best just to let it play out. I agreed with him.

The testimony about pardons also highlighted the absence of deposition evidence from former White House counsel Pat Cipollone whom the panels vice chair, Liz Cheney, has urged to testify in recent days and his deputy Patrick Philbin. Both have met informally with the committee but not figured much into the public hearings. Some testimony Thursday suggested that Philbin was on the receiving end of pardon requests.

As the select panel prepares to add new evidence to hearings next month, Chair Bennie Thompson told reporters the committee could back up its allegations about the GOP pardon bids: We can prove what we showed today.

Its fifth public hearing underscored the lengths Trump and his allies went to enlist DOJ in his effort to seize a second term after losing the election. Trumps top officials at the time acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, his deputy Richard Donoghue and former Office of Legal Counsel Chief Steven Engel described a series of increasingly desperate meetings to fend off Trumps effort to deploy DOJ in service of his effort, and an intense, ultimately successful effort to prevent him from installing a more compliant official atop the department.

He pressured the justice Department to act as an arm of his reelection campaign, Thompson said.

The panel also highlighted Trumps own direct pressure on DOJ, which escalated in the days after former Attorney General William Barr announced his resignation in mid-December 2020.

... Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the [Republican] Congressmen, Donoghue recalled Trump saying during a Dec. 27, 2020, meeting.

The hearing highlighted how Trumps West Wing became a haven for conspiracy theories about election fraud that he then tasked DOJ and other cabinet agencies to investigate. When the theories were debunked, Trump would fall back on new ones, often plucked from far-flung corners of the internet and laundered through pro-Trump channels until they reached the Oval Office.

You guys may not be following the internet the way I do, Trump told the officials, according to Thursdays testimony.

Donoghue described one such theory that Italian satellites had switched votes from Trump to Joe Biden as pure insanity. But the select committee also showed that Trumps newly appointed acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller called officials in Italy to inquire about the bizarre theory.

Much of the hearing emphasized how Trumps allies in Congress helped ratchet up pressure on DOJ even as the Department systematically debunked Donald Trumps election fraud claims.

The select panel showed Thursday that Perry who now chairs the House Freedom Caucus helped link Trump with Jeffrey Clark, a little-known DOJ environmental official whom Trump hoped would amplify his debunked claims of voter fraud. Perry brought Clark to the White House on Dec. 22, 2020, according to visitor logs released by the Capitol riot committee.

Trump would go as far as offering Clark the Justice Departments top job, only to back down as Rosen, Donoghue and Engel as well as Cipollone warned of a mass exodus within DOJ. Engels warning to Trump that a Clark-run DOJ would be a graveyard apparently affected Trump, the witnesses said, and he backed off the plan.

Donoghue emphasized that Trump made clear he wasnt interested in the merit of any election fraud allegations only in DOJs willingness to endorse them, then leave the rest to him and his allies. As part of that plot, Trump had pressed his DOJ leaders to issue a letter describing concerns about election irregularities in multiple states.

Clark was prepared to issue that letter, urging states to convene their legislatures and consider whether to appoint new presidential electors who would favor Trump. Clark, asked about these matters by the select committee during a deposition earlier this year, invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against potential self-incrimination and claimed executive privilege.

FBI officials raided Clarks home Wednesday, a sign some select committee members saw as part of a rapidly escalating criminal inquiry against Trumps efforts to overturn the election.

In court filings connected to its investigation, the committee revealed text messages between Perry and then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in which Perry urged Meadows to elevate Clark at DOJ as quickly as possible. The two also discussed a potential deputy for Clark. The select committee has also obtained testimony that Meadows burned some papers in his office after meeting with Perry during those crucial post-election weeks.

Rosen and Donoghue also described their experiences on Jan. 6, noting that they were on the phone constantly with congressional leaders, cabinet officials, then-Vice President Mike Pence and senior White House aides. But they noted that they never heard from Trump amid the chaos.

Betsy Woodruff Swan and Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

Read more from the original source:
Multiple House Republicans on defensive over Jan. 6 panel testimony that they sought post-riot pardons - POLITICO