Lawyer claims Ken Paxton hired him to go after political enemies, then left him out to dry
Anna Giaritelli
Video Embed
AUSTIN, Texas — A personal injury lawyer hired by Ken Paxton to investigate crimes that wealthy political donor Nate Paul alleged testified before the Senate on Tuesday that he was duped by the now-impeached attorney general.
Then 34-year-old Houston defense attorney Brandon Cammack said at Paxton’s impeachment trial that he believed he had been hired by Paxton as an employee of the attorney general’s office in 2020 but was abandoned by Paxton after federal investigators intervened in a wild subpoena spree that Cammack had waged with Paxton’s blessing.
MCCARTHY ANNOUNCES IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY INTO PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN
“I had a whole entire life before all of this. … I had clients,” Cammack said. “I didn’t ask for any of this. You guys reached out to me to do a job, and now you’re pulling the rug out from under me. I’m getting cease and desist letters. Now my name’s being thrown through the mud in the media.”
Cammack was in private practice when he first received a call on Aug. 22, 2020, from Michael Wynne, the attorney for real estate developer Nate Paul. Cammack knew Wynne through a Houston civics panel and had recently met at an event.
Wynne informed Cammack that he had recommended the young lawyer to Paxton for an undisclosed matter and that Paxton might reach out by phone. Paxton and Cammack spoke the following day, and Paxton said he was looking to hire someone to work on a “criminal investigation.” The two scheduled a time for Cammack to travel from Houston to Austin and meet Paxton at his government office.
Cammack visited Paxton on Aug. 26 and brought his resume at Paxton’s request.
“He said he was looking to hire a special prosecutor to investigate a criminal case where potentially there were potential violations of the Texas penal code,” Cammack testified.
Cammack said he was unsure what his specific role as an attorney would entail but was told he could possibly present the case to a jury at some point.
Paxton told Cammack that he was searching for an outside lawyer to hire because “his own staff would not work on what he wanted to work on” and that Cammack was among “multiple” people being interviewed.
Paxton sent Cammack a contract during the first week of September 2020, which the private lawyer took as confirmation that he had landed the job. Cammack agreed to work for $300 per hour.
Cammack testified that it was only after receiving the contract that he learned Paul was under investigation by the FBI and had filed a complaint against the federal magistrate who signed a search warrant of Paul’s property.
Cammack met with Paul at his office in Austin. He said the only thing he knew about Paul up until then was from a Google search of his name. Paul did most of the talking during their meeting and showed Cammack a copy of the search warrant that was issued.
Paul was “energetic, passionate, and had a lot of conviction, kind of an aggressive attitude,” Cammack recalled.
The young attorney found Paul’s claims that the warrant had been amended “convincing” and shared as much when he met Paxton at his official office later that day.
“I was fired up about the opportunity,” Cammack said. “I was excited to be working on a project with the attorney general’s office.”
Despite the excitement, Cammack said several times during his testimony that he was confused and not given specifics about why Paxton’s senior aides were not handling the case.
“He said he couldn’t get the people in his office to work on this case,” Cammack said.
Cammack expressed to Paxton early on that he already had 75 cases that his office was handling and he was unsure about what this new workload would require of him. Paxton assured him it would be simple — that Cammack would need to get the original copy of a search warrant.
Cammack said he was told he would be looking into a referral that the Travis County District Attorney’s office in Austin made to search Paul’s property and a second referral regarding banks involved in a foreclosure against Paul.
Cammack asked Paxton if his employment contract included his working on the second referral and was reassured by the attorney general.
Asked who had hired him, Cammack was emphatic that the state government had hired him as part of the attorney general’s staff and that he reported directly to Paxton and was repeatedly reassured he was on the right track in his investigation and efforts.
Cammack asked Paxton by text and phone call when he would obtain his badge and credentials that verified he worked for the attorney general’s office, but was told by Paxton repeatedly over a period of weeks that it would be coming soon.
Cammack did not revolt when Paxton declined to set him up with a government email address or when Paxton himself set up a secure email account on Proton for the new hire. Cammack said he purchased a burner phone used only to speak with Paxton. Paxton also instructed Cammack to text him through an encrypted phone app called Signal.
“Are you saying that you ultimately got a phone that was totally dedicated to phone conversations with the attorney general of the state of Texas, and that’s the only number that you communicated with on that phone,” asked House prosecution attorney Rusty Hardin.
“Yes, sir,” Cammack said.
“Did you trust the attorney general?” Hardin asked.
“Yes, sir.”
“Were you flattered about him reaching out to you?” Hardin asked.
“Yes, sir.”
Cammack was given a five- to six-page document with a timeline of events that outlined Paul’s version of what happened in the case.
Cammack kept Paxton abreast of developments and reported only to Paxton and proposed issuing grand jury subpoenas in the case in an effort to gather information about the warrant. Paxton greenlighted the move, and Cammack sent out nearly 40 subpoenas, which triggered one upset recipient to report the matter to federal officials.
Cammack said he “got affirmation [from Paxton] the entire time that everything was good.”
Paxton reassured Cammack that his work contract allowed for the issuing the subpoenas, but Cammack was confused when two U.S. Marshal’s Office federal agents showed up at his Houston office to inquire about his work with Paxton.
Cammack returned to Austin to speak with Paul, Wynne, and Paxton to understand why there was suddenly an issue with his work that he believed was done as an employee of the state. Instead, he was fired and told he would not be paid for his weeks spent investigating and issuing subpoenas.
“Are you saying that these guys took you over to a Starbucks outside the office, terminated your contract, told you you weren’t going to get paid, and then drove off?'” Hardin asked, noting that Cammack needed to find a ride back to his car.
“That’s what it looked like,” said Cammack.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Paxton faces 16 articles of impeachment for a slew of alleged white-collar crimes related to his time in office since 2019.
The Senate is expected to decide on the charges later this week after the defense and prosecution have heard from eight witnesses.