Angela Paxton won't recuse herself from husband's impeachment trial

Travis County Republican party chairman Matt Mackowiak and Democratic analyst Ed Espinoza sit down with FOX 7's Mike Warren to discuss the latest developments from the Paxton Senate impeachment trial.

AUSTIN, Texas - State Senator Angela Paxson will not be recusing herself from impeachment proceedings against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

She released a statement saying the Texas Constitution requires her to attend the impeachment trial of her husband, Attorney General Ken Paxton. She also said she will attend because her constituents deserve it.

The statement reads in full:

"I have twice been elected to represent the nearly one million Texans who reside in Senate District 8, and it is a tremendous honor and privilege to be their voice in the Texas Legislature. Each time I was elected, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this great state, and Texas law compels each member of the Senate to attend when the Senate meets as a court of impeachment. As a member of the Senate, I hold these obligations sacred and I will carry out my duties, not because it is easy, but because the Constitution demands it and my constituents deserve it.

Democratic analyst Ed Espinosa and Matt Mackowiak, chair of the Travis County Republican Party joined FOX 7 Austin's Mike Warren to discuss.

Ken Paxton's wife won't recuse herself from his impeachment trial

State Sen. Angela Paxton says, "I will carry out my duties - not because it is easy - but because the constitution demands it and because my constituents deserve it."

MIKE WARREN: Matt Mackowiak, the senator, says she is duty bound to be a part of this impeachment of her husband. Do you think there is a conflict of interest?

MATT MACKOWIAK: Well, it's technically true that she is required to be there. The Constitution says that all senators must be present through the entirety of any impeachment trial. Seriously faced a choice. She released a statement, and we'll see whether the Senate rules speak to whether there's a process for a conflict to be adjudicated. This is not a court of law. This is really a political court in a sense. They will be considering very serious charges, but they're coming up with their own rules. Rules of evidence, rules that apply in a court of law are not necessarily at play here. So while I think on a certain level, you could say it's a conflict. She's his wife. She has personal knowledge. She has personal feelings and emotions about everything at play here. I also think it's fair and true to say that a million or so Texans would not have representation in the Senate trial if she were to not participate. She has not said whether she will vote. She has said she will participate.

MIKE WARREN: Ed Espinoza, this question of is there a conflict of interest? What's your take on that?

ED ESPINOZA: Any rational Texan would tell you that there is absolutely 100% a conflict of interest, because let's face reality here, Mike, Angela Paxton's vote is predetermined before any of this happens. We know that she is going to devote to defend her husband, the attorney general, while he's under impeachment. But I don't think any rational person is going to say otherwise. And while she may have a duty to represent her people, the Senate also has a duty for an impartial administration of justice, which, by the way, is one of the things that Ken Paxton is being impeached for. So I think that this is a problem. I don't know what the solution is. I do think the Senate is. I wish the Senate would have some sort of obligation to come up with a solution. But unfortunately, you've got 31 jurors and 30 who are impartial in this situation.

MIKE WARREN: Matt Mackowiak, is this impending trial causing conflict within the GOP or the entire Texas legislature?

MATT MACKOWIAK: I think the answer that's yes. There's no question you had this dropped on the House the last week of the regular session. Having had the investigation be conducted in secret, they had very little time to review the investigation, very little access to the materials the investigators found and secured. And they debated this for only a matter of hours with really no due process for General Paxton and his defense team. The Senate, I think, is going to be totally different. And we are waiting to see what the rules are going to be. Are there rules of evidence? Will witnesses be allowed? Will the attorney general be asked to or be allowed to testify? Will there be a motion to dismiss summary judgment at the beginning? These are all important questions that we expect to hear answers on the next 12 to 24 hours. But yes, this has been a divisive issue within the Republican Party. You had 61 Republicans in the House vote to advance to impeachment. You have whatever the other number, 20 or so Republicans say no, You had every Democrat vote to advance the impeachment. So add this idea that people don't prejudge and come to a certain conclusion and that there's no politics here, I think is pretty ridiculous.

MIKE WARREN: Okay. Ed Espinoza, real quickly, final word from you.

ED ESPINOZA: Matt might say it's ridiculous, but the House committee that charged that recommended he be impeached was three Republicans and two Democrats. It's actually closer House split than people seem to realize, but every Democrat could have not voted or voted the opposite way. And Ken Paxton still would have had a recommendation to impeach because all Republicans were doing that. And look, only 30% of the Republican primary think primary voters think that Paxton is innocent here. The other 70% not so sure. And this is why he had so many primary challengers going back two years ago.