At the end of September 2020, it finally made sense to Jeff Mateer why his boss, Attorney General Ken Paxton, was devoting so much of the agency’s attention to Paxton’s friend, Austin real estate investor Nate Paul.

In Wednesday testimony that took up most of the second day of Paxton’s impeachment trial, Mateer said that for months he could not figure out why Paxton had brushed off repeated warnings that assisting Paul in his business disputes was an improper use of state resources.

And then, as the office was erupting in crisis when senior deputies learned that Paxton had quietly hired an outside lawyer to conduct an investigation on Paul’s behalf, Mateer said he learned something else. Paul had hired the woman with whom Paxton was having an extramarital affair, allowing her to move to Austin, where the attorney general could more easily visit her.

“It answered the question, why is he engaging in all these activities … on behalf of Mr. Paul?” Mateer testified. “It seemed to be he was under undue influence. At times, I wondered: Is he being blackmailed?”

In more than six hours of testimony, Mateer — the first witness called by the House impeachment managers — detailed his growing concerns through the summer and fall of 2020 about Paxton’s relationship with Paul, culminating in Mateer’s decision to join other senior advisers in reporting the attorney general’s behavior to the FBI on Sept. 30.

“I concluded that Mr. Paxton was engaged in conduct that was immoral, unethical, and I had the good faith belief that it was illegal,” Mateer testified.

Paxton’s lawyer attempted to cast Mateer as a rogue employee and disloyal friend of Paxton, arguing that the former first assistant jumped to conclusions about impropriety based on incomplete and inaccurate information. Attorney Tony Buzbee also accused Mateer of leading an attempted coup against Paxton.

But as Paxton has cast the impeachment as a persecution led by Democrats and liberal Republicans, Mateer presented a problem. He is an evangelical Christian and champion of religious liberty whose hiring by Paxton was praised by conservatives. And unlike four other senior deputies who filed a whistleblower lawsuit and later negotiated a proposed $3.3 million settlement — prompting Paxton’s camp to suggest they had a financial motivation for their allegations — Mateer simply quit within days of meeting with FBI agents in 2020.

Paxton on Tuesday pleaded not guilty to 16 articles of impeachment. The bulk of the House’s case centers on allegations that Paxton misused the power of the attorney general’s office to harass Paul’s perceived enemies, including business rivals, judges and law enforcement officials.

As expected, the attorney general’s affair with Laura Olson, the former Senate aide Buzbee identified by name during the trial, took center stage in the trial.

Mateer exhibited a pained expression when asked about the relationship, as Paxton’s wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, sat about 30 feet away — present for the trial but barred from deliberating or voting by Senate rules. Prodded by impeachment lawyer Rusty Hardin, Mateer said the affair was the missing piece that explained the bizarre behavior Paxton had exhibited in asking his senior deputies to help Paul.

Mateer added that he was present for a 2018 meeting in which Paxton, joined by his wife, admitted to the extramarital affair but said it was over and that he had recommitted to his marriage.

“Mr. Paxton apologized and, using Christian terminology, I would say he repented,” Mateer said. “I assumed it was over because that’s what he said.”

Sen. Paxton, at her desk, took notes as Mateer spoke. She has maintained a bright disposition during the trial, chatting with colleagues during breaks and waving to supporters in the gallery.

Mateer’s appearance was widely anticipated due to his position as Paxton’s most senior deputy and because he has said little publicly in the nearly three years since he resigned his post in October 2020.

Yet it was initially unclear if Mateer’s testimony would live up to its top billing when it began late Tuesday afternoon. Hardin, a genteel lawyer for the House managers, meandered while asking Mateer about his background, leaving senators to wonder when, if ever, he would get to the point.

Wednesday offered a reset. Hardin, normally loquacious, buckled down. He led Mateer through the summer of 2020, asking him to explain his growing discomfort with Paxton’s actions.

Mateer said he first knew little about Paul but was concerned when Paxton wished to personally argue a court motion in a case involving a charity that had sued two of Paul’s businesses. He said his consternation grew when Paxton directed the office to issue a legal opinion limiting foreclosure sales during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We were at the forefront of having Texas reopen and to stop COVID restrictions. … We were the ones pushing to have Texas open up,” Mateer said. “The opinion took the complete opposite view.”

Impeachment managers allege that Paul used the opinion to delay the foreclosure sale of several properties.

Mateer also said Paxton repeatedly pressured him to approve the hiring of an outside lawyer to investigate claims made by Paul. The former top deputy recalled that Paxton called him late on Sept. 28 and was “very upset” with Mateer’s refusal to support the hiring, adding that Paxton’s demeanor led him to believe he had been drinking.

Mateer said the next day, he and other senior officials realized that the outside lawyer, Brandon Cammack, had in fact started working for the office weeks earlier, without their knowledge. They also discovered Cammack had issued subpoenas to banks that had lent money to Paul’s businesses.

“We considered it sort of a crisis moment,” Mateer said. “Everything regarding Mr. Paul was coming to a head.”

Another senior official then rushed to court and persuaded the judge to throw out the subpoenas, arguing Cammack had no power to issue them.

Buzbee attempts to discredit Mateer

For the cross-examination, Buzbee’s rapid-fire, quick-pivot questioning of Mateer was in stark contrast to Hardin’s chronological questioning that bordered on tedious. Instead of offering a counter-narrative to the House’s version of events, Buzbee sought to discredit Mateer and land punches where he could.

He homed in on a theme of Mateer as a misguided employee and friend who should have taken his concerns directly to Paxton instead of going behind his back to report him to law enforcement. He challenged Mateer’s contention that he and other senior deputies were attempting to protect the attorney general from himself.

“In order to protect Ken Paxton, what you did was you then called the FBI?” Buzbee asked. “That’s how you protected your friend?”

“That’s not correct, sir,” Mateer replied.

Buzbee suggested that if Mateer had asked Paxton about Cammack, he would have learned that the attorney general had properly hired him and that the subpoenas were a legitimate inquiry into a second Paul complaint that Mateer did not know about.

“So you went to the FBI thinking that this kid, as you called [Cammack], should not be subpoenaing banks?” Buzbee asked. “But you now know that if he was charged … to investigate bid rigging, then that might be something that he might subpoena?”

“I actually don’t know that,” Mateer replied.

What Buzbee did not mention, however, was that Paul’s second complaint alleged that he was the victim of a wide-ranging conspiracy by business rivals, a court-appointed lawyer and a federal judge to steal his properties. No evidence has emerged, in the impeachment trial or any other forum, supporting the claim, which Paul code named “Operation Tarrytown.”

And House exhibits reveal that Paul and his lawyer had directed Cammack on how to conduct the probe, including by identifying investigative targets and writing the subpoenas.

As the cross-examination entered its third hour, Buzbee tried to elicit damaging admissions from Mateer, but the seasoned lawyer was unfazed. At one point, Buzbee asked at what hourly rate would an outside counsel be too expensive for the attorney general’s office.

“What’s your rate?” Mateer quipped.

At another, Buzbee returned to the argument that Mateer was insubordinate in joining other senior advisers in reporting Paxton to law enforcement.

“You were involved in a coup, weren’t you?” Buzbee asked.

“Absolutely not,” Mateer said.

Paxton a no-show, again, for trial

Paxton was again absent for Wednesday’s impeachment proceedings.

The suspended attorney general was present Tuesday morning while Buzbee entered not guilty pleas on his behalf, but he did not return after the lunch break as lawyers for the House impeachment managers called their first witness.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who is the presiding officer over the impeachment trial, agreed with Paxton’s attorneys Tuesday after they argued that trial rules did not require Paxton’s presence beyond entering a plea.

Everything was going according to plan.

In September 2020, subpoenas were served to executives at four Texas banks who Austin real estate investor Nate Paul — a friend of Attorney General Ken Paxton — believed had information about an illegal scheme to defraud him.

The subpoenas were signed by Brandon Cammack, who identified himself as a special prosecutor with the Texas Attorney General’s office. But they were written by Paul.

Earlier, Paul had sent a list of targets to Cammack, via his lawyer, who he wanted to see investigated and subpoenaed in what he called “Operation Deep Sea.” He alleged he was the target of two massive yet separate conspiracies perpetrated by business rivals, judges and several law enforcement agencies, including agents that participated in an FBI-led raid on his home and business a year earlier.

Cammack persuaded a judge to approve 25 additional subpoenas, which sought email or phone records of prosecutors investigating Paul, federal court staff, police officers, the head of a charity who sued him, a court-appointed lawyer in that lawsuit and the lawyer’s wife.

All of those targets were on Paul’s list. And the investigation would never have happened without the support of Paxton.

The hiring of Cammack is a key charge in the Texas House’s impeachment case against Paxton, a third-term Republican, who is accused of misusing his office to help Paul in return for free home renovations and the investor’s help covering up the attorney general’s extramarital affair.

The Senate trial to determine if he will permanently be removed from office begins Sept. 5. The impeachment managers allege Paxton hired Cammack to carry out Paul’s bidding — allowing him to use the attorney general’s office as his “concierge law firm,” and harness its investigative powers to harass business rivals and other perceived enemies.

Emails, meeting transcripts, invoices and court records obtained by The Texas Tribune or released by the House impeachment managers shed new light on just how closely Paul and his attorney worked with Cammack to direct the investigation. For example, at one point Cammack drafted a search warrant affidavit that was nearly verbatim from a document Paul wrote.

Records also show that Cammack, who was handpicked by Paul, was working in secret, without the knowledge of Paxton’s top deputies. Those deputies advised him to distance himself from Paul, whom they regarded as a liar and a criminal.

“The whole idea to me was so outrageous that we would ever get involved in anything like that,” Blake Brickman, former deputy attorney general for policy and strategic initiatives, told House investigators. “… None of us wanted Paxton to actually go hire someone to do this.”

The discovery that Cammack had been working without their knowledge, he said, was what convinced eight senior officials in the office to report Paxton’s behavior to the FBI in 2020.

Paul was federally indicted in June on eight felony counts, accused of lying on financial statements in order to obtain loans. One of the lenders he allegedly deceived had received a subpoena from Cammack.

Lawyers for Paxton and Cammack declined to make them available for comment, citing the impeachment trial gag order. Paul did not respond.

Paul’s heavy hand in the investigation into his own complaint is unusual. While alleged crime victims often provide prosecutors valuable information and evidence, they should not be permitted to direct how an investigation is conducted, said Tom Berg, a former assistant Harris County district attorney.

“The prosecutor is supposed to do an independent evaluation of the merits of the case before he brings it,” Berg said.

He added that Paxton should have recused himself from overseeing the investigation because of his personal relationship with Paul.

Seeking help for a friend

The origin of the friendship between Paul, a hotshot real estate player, and Paxton, a buttoned-up lawyer 24 years older, remains unclear, save for a $25,000 campaign contribution the investor gave the politician in October 2018.

But by the end of 2019, court records show that many of Paul’s businesses were in severe financial trouble. Though Paul had once boasted of a portfolio worth $1.2 billion, in the preceding 18 months his businesses had defaulted on five loans or settlements, been sued by three creditors or investors and filed five bankruptcies, a Tribune analysis found.

Paul claimed he had been harassed by state and federal law enforcement officers in a raid of his home and business headquarters in August 2019. He also alleged they had altered the search warrants after they had been approved by a judge.

Paxton believed this account, his former deputies later told investigators, and wanted someone to investigate if any of those officials broke the law.

“This is terrible,” Mark Penley, then-deputy attorney general for criminal justice, recalled Paxton saying in December 2019. “It sounds like the FBI is doing really bad things.”

But for months he struggled to find anyone who would take Paul’s claims seriously.

Paxton first arranged a lunch meeting in May 2020 with Paul, his lawyer Michael Wynne and two senior officials with the Travis County District Attorney’s Office. Mindy Montford, the district attorney’s first assistant, said later in an interview with investigators that she found Paul’s story “very incredulous.” But since the office wanted to maintain a good relationship with Paxton, Montford said, prosecutors agreed to invite Paul to make his complaint in writing and then refer it to the attorney general’s office. This gave Paxton jurisdiction to open an investigation of his own.

At Paxton’s request, then-Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Justice David Maxwell met with Paul three times in July and August that year. Penley joined for two of them.

Paul and his lawyer repeated the allegations, this time with the help of a PowerPoint presentation they named “Operation Longhorn.” They said the metadata in digital search warrants proved they had been altered. Their theory was that originally agents got permission to search for drugs but after finding none, illegally changed the warrants to search for evidence of financial crimes.

Penley, a former 16-year federal prosecutor, told House investigators the allegation “sounded absolutely crazy.” Maxwell, who served 24 years as a Texas Ranger, said he told Paul he’d never seen an instance where multiple agencies colluded to doctor a search warrant. The agency’s forensic examiners said the metadata could have changed for many reasons, including encryption that is a routine practice of the Department of Justice.

Paxton was frustrated. In an interview the attorney general later gave to law enforcement officials, he lamented how his deputies weren’t taking Paul’s allegations seriously.

“I just realized my office wasn’t getting it done,” Paxton said.

The acrimony was mutual. The attorney general’s senior officers wondered why, when the office was under tremendous pressure to help state and local officials understand their authority to manage the COVID-19 pandemic, Paxton was devoting so many resources to a single person.

“We were spending an increasingly large share of our calendar time focused on Nate Paul,” Paxton’s personal aide, Drew Wicker, later told House investigators.

A willing investigator

Unlike the top deputies at the attorney general’s office, Cammack had never been a prosecutor or police officer. He did not, as they did, have decades of experience as an attorney. He did, however, possess a trait they lacked: the willingness to take direction from Paul and his attorney.

Cammack, who graduated from the University of Houston Law Center in 2015, knew Wynne through professional circles in Houston. It was Wynne who connected him to Paxton, who in early September 2020 hired Cammack as an outside counsel to investigate Paul’s complaint.

Once hired, Cammack worked closely with Paul and Wynne. While Penley and Maxwell had pushed back against Paul’s claims, the investigation by Cammack proceeded as if Paul were running it.

Cammack on Sept. 3 met with Wynne and Paul for more than three hours and had a 15-minute call with Paxton about the investigation on Sept. 6, according to his billing records. Four days later, Wynne sent Cammack the document created by Paul called “Operation Deep Sea.”

It contained suggested targets for subpoenas and search warrants, to be served immediately, as well as an investigative roadmap that outlined the tasks to be completed such as “announced or unannounced visits in person” at the U.S. attorney’s office, Department of Public Safety, FBI and other law enforcement offices. The plan detailed what communications to seek and tools to get the information such as “grand jury subpoenas” and “search teams.”

A document Nate Paul's attorney sent Brandon Cammack titled "Operation Deep Sea," to direct how Paul wanted the investigation into his enemies to proceed.

A Sept. 25 email from Wynne to Cammack and Paul about reaching targets by phone underscored the sense of urgency.

“They don’t talk, we are at their residences tomorrow,” Wynne wrote.

The scope of the probe Paul envisioned was far broader than what he had unsuccessfully pitched to Penley and Maxwell. The targets included not only state and federal law enforcement, prosecutors and court clerks, but individuals with whom Paul was engaged in business disputes and the lawyers who represented them.

It also extended beyond Paul’s complaint of law enforcement mistreatment, which was Paxton’s official basis for hiring Cammack. This changed on Sept. 23, when the Travis County District Attorney's Office referred to Cammack a new complaint that Paul had just filed.

This complaint, which Paul code-named “Operation Tarrytown,” laid out a second, wide-ranging conspiracy, different from the first in all respects save for its contention that Paul was the victim. This time, Paul alleged that a group of Austin businessmen had conspired to acquire the loans on several of his properties, force them into foreclosure and then rig the public auctions at which they were sold. And to pull off the scam, the group had enlisted the help of a court-appointed lawyer and federal bankruptcy judge, who agreed to participate.

More than 80% of a draft search warrant affidavit Cammack wrote was copied from Paul’s complaint, a Tribune analysis found.

In one instance, Cammack appeared to forget to switch from Paul’s first-person perspective, referring to one of the investor’s creditors as “my lender.” Cammack never ended up filing the search warrant.

Cammack forwarded the complaint to a private email address belonging to Paxton on Sept. 25. Paxton also met with Cammack, Wynne and Paul at the investor’s Austin home in late September, two sources with knowledge of the meeting said.

By Sept. 28, Cammack had persuaded a judge to approve 29 subpoenas. Paul supplied all of the targets, the Tribune found by cross-referencing the court records with emails received by Cammack.

And in the case of four subpoenas to banks that had lent money to Paul’s businesses, Cammack was quick to follow Paul’s instructions.

Hours after Cammack received the targets and language to use, he replied to Wynne via email, “applications for GJ subpoenas to former lenders went out,” referring to the grand jury.

If the recipients complied with the orders, Paul would have gained access to private records of those investigating his criminal case, the charity he was fighting in a lawsuit and businessmen who had purchased loans his companies had defaulted on.

But the scheme started unraveling the next day when Cammack visited two banks with Wynne to serve the subpoenas and attempt to interview bank executives. In recordings of the encounters made by Cammack and later obtained by investigators, he is polite and disarming, assuring one bank president he wasn’t in any sort of trouble.

The banks, however, were spooked. A lawyer for Bancorp emailed Cammack asking him to provide proof he was, in fact, representing the attorney general’s office. Counsel for Amplify Credit Union called the office directly with the same question. The assistant attorney general who took the call grew concerned when she could not find Cammack in the office’s directory.

By Sept. 30, Paxton’s top deputies realized that Cammack had been working with Paul without their knowledge for four weeks. Horrified, Penley sent a letter to Cammack demanding that he stop work immediately. Cammack forwarded the email to Paxton an hour later with the subject line “URGENT.”

Penley on Oct. 1 asked a judge to throw out the subpoenas Cammack had obtained because he lacked the authority to issue them. There were 39.

When Paxton found out about the motion, he called Montford, the first assistant Travis County district attorney. He said his staff had lied, that Cammack’s appointment was legitimate, and that the court needed to know this information, Montford told investigators.

“I would like to be heard by the judge,” Paxton said to Montford.

But it was too late, she informed Paxton. The judge had already quashed the subpoenas.

Cammack ceased working as Penley instructed and sent an invoice for $14,025. The agency has yet to pay it.

Paxton on Oct. 2 placed Penley and Maxwell on investigative leave and fired both a month later.

Wynne wrote a letter to Paxton on Oct. 11 outlining a new complaint. The attorney general’s top deputies had inappropriately intervened to stop Cammack’s investigation, he said, and falsely stated that it lacked merit.

“The actions of employees of the OAG have severely harmed and disadvantaged a Texas citizen and his family of their constitutional rights,” Wynne wrote.

The victim, once again, was Paul.

Robert Downen, Joshua Fechter, Jolie McCullough, Kate McGee and Alejandro Serrano contributed research.

Carla Astudillo contributed to this report.

Disclosure: The University of Houston has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Drew Wicker did not like what he was hearing.

The personal assistant to Attorney General Ken Paxton stood in his boss’s kitchen in summer 2020 as Paxton expressed his desire for granite countertops with a contractor who estimated a $20,000 price tag for the upgrade.

“I will check with Nate,” the contractor said after Paxton agreed to the cost, according to Wicker. When Paxton brought up other fixes he wanted for his Austin property, the contractor said he’d have to check with Nate about those, too.

Nate, Wicker understood, was Nate Paul, the Austin real estate investor Paxton had been meeting frequently with that spring and summer to discuss Paul’s various legal problems, including his claim of mistreatment by police after a raid at his home. To Wicker, the conversation sounded as if Paul would be paying for the renovation.

Wicker was so uncomfortable that he raised the issue with Paxton about a week later as they ate burgers at a Plano restaurant. Paxton assured Wicker he was paying for the renovations personally.

Ken Paxton’s former personal assistant Drew Wicker.

Three years later, those granite countertops have emerged as a key piece of evidence in the impeachment case against Paxton, who is accused of misusing the attorney general’s office to help his friend Paul fend off a federal investigation into his flailing real estate empire. And Wicker — Paxton’s aide who grew into a family friend — has become one of the key witnesses in the case against his former boss. Among the 20 articles of impeachment laid out by the Texas House is an allegation that Paul paid for not just countertops but an extensive renovation of Paxton’s Tarrytown property in exchange for the attorney general’s help with his legal issues.

As one of the aides who spent the most time at the attorney general’s side, Wicker proved an invaluable source as a House committee investigated Paxton in secret this spring before recommending he be impeached.

“I’m going to give you the best recollection, and then I’m going to trust that the evidence points where it shall,” Wicker told his interviewers. “And if that ends up being that (Paxton) conducted illegal business, then I love the man all the same and I hope that that gets adjusted, but he also needs to be held to account.”

The transcript of Wicker’s May 19 interview, released Thursday night along with nearly 4,000 pages of evidence compiled by the House, provided investigators with details on multiple abuses they would allege Paxton committed in office.

Wicker described to investigators a close relationship with Paxton and said that his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, once joked that he was the couple’s “second son.” Wicker resigned shortly after Paxton’s top deputies accused him of corruption in September 2020, turning down a promotion to a policy role the attorney general had offered. He described the last three years as a “nightmare,” adding that he had also been subpoenaed by the FBI.

Wicker joined the office in September 2019, a month after finishing graduate school at Georgetown University, where he studied political economy. Recommended by a senior official in the office whom he knew, Wicker met with Paxton and was hired on the spot.

The role of the attorney general’s body man was demanding, usually stretching well past the 9-to-5 workday. Wicker often drove Paxton around, managed his schedule and couriered documents that needed the attorney general’s review or signature. He also got to travel with Paxton, including a trip to China just a few months into the job.

He added that sometimes he did personal errands for Paxton that were outside of his job description, like moving clothes from the Tarrytown house while it was being renovated.

“My view on my job and my role was that if I could make his life a little bit easier … that allowed him to better focus on issues pertaining to the state,” Wicker said.

Wicker said he met Paul in spring of 2020, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, and estimated he saw the real estate developer a dozen times over the following months. Sometimes, he and Paxton had lunch with Paul; on other occasions, they visited Paul at his downtown Austin office a few blocks south of the attorney general’s office.

He said there was a “good amount of discussion” about an FBI raid on Paul’s home and business in August 2019 and that Paxton felt the episode was a “miscarriage of justice.” The House investigators say Paul, meanwhile, wanted the attorney general’s help in obtaining the private search warrant documents the bureau had filed with the court. Paul was federally indicted in June on eight counts of making false statements to financial institutions.

The young aide also recalled an instance that summer in which he delivered a manila folder to Paul at Paxton’s request. Investigators believe that folder contained the confidential FBI files about the criminal probe into Paul, which Paxton leaked to the developer.

Wicker was frustrated with how much energy Paxton was focusing on his relationship with Paul. House investigators said they discovered at least 20 meetings between the pair that spring and summer, despite the burgeoning pandemic.

“We had a number of issues that were top of mind … in terms of policy and initiatives,” Wicker said. “And we were spending an increasingly large share of our calendar time focused on Nate Paul.”

Wicker, by chance, also discovered evidence that Paxton had resumed an extramarital affair with a Senate staffer that his top deputies thought was over.

The relationship between Paxton and the woman is central to the impeachment case. House investigators allege that Paul hired her in June 2020 as a favor to Paxton, allowing her to move from San Antonio to Austin.

At a meeting with senior staff in September 2018, with his wife by his side, Paxton disclosed that he had a relationship with the woman, but that it was over and he had recommitted to his marriage, the Associated Press previously reported.

But Wicker, visiting the Omni Barton Creek hotel with his family in summer 2020, ran into Paxton getting off the elevator with a woman who was not his wife.

“No words were said,” Wicker recalled. “Paxton walked out, shook my hand, shook my father’s hand and the lady walked out, didn’t acknowledge us or say anything.”

Wicker said he reported what he saw to Marc Rylander, the Paxton senior adviser who had told him about the affair when he started the job. Wicker described what the woman looked like.

“Great,” Rylander replied. “She’s back.”

"Texas House committee recommends expelling Rep. Bryan Slaton" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

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

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

The video is compiled from audio and video footage from officers who responded to Robb Elementary School in Uvalde on May 24, 2022. The video does not include images of the shooter or victims. Credit: Todd Wiseman and Jinitzail Hernández / The Texas Tribune

Having trouble viewing? Watch this video on texastribune.org.

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