Yes, he took a lawyer's $1,000 Montblanc from a courthouse security tray, and yes, it's on video. That is the least interesting thing on this website.
The public record on Ken Paxton, by the numbers — every figure below is footnoted
He was acquitted by the Texas Senate and has never been convicted of a crime. We say so here, at the top, and again at the bottom. Every claim on this page is a court record, a recorded vote, sworn testimony, or a document his own office published — 58 footnotes, all linked.
Attorney Joe Joplin put his silver Montblanc — a gift from his wife — in the tray at the Collin County courthouse security checkpoint. Surveillance video shows Ken Paxton, then a Republican state legislator, picking it up and walking off with it.[1][2]
A sheriff's deputy reviewed the footage and contacted Paxton, who returned the pen. No charges were filed — Joplin could have pressed them and chose not to.[2][3] A Paxton spokesman said the pen was returned "when the error was realized."[1] In 2026 his campaign called it "nothing more than a mix-up at security."[4]
Note on dates: news accounts variously place the incident in 2012, 2013, or 2014. Everyone agrees on the pen.[1][2][5]
The pen is a joke. We named a website after it. But it is a joke that stuck for fourteen years because of everything under it — and everything under it is a matter of public record: recorded votes, court judgments, sworn testimony, and documents his own office published.
Nothing on the rest of this page is an allegation from us. Every claim below is footnoted. Where he was cleared, we say so.
Texans are advised to maintain visual contact with all fine writing instruments while within one (1) county of a statewide officeholder.
Not opponents. Not Democrats. Not reporters. The most senior lawyers in the Office of the Attorney General — conservative Republicans he had personally hired — went to federal law enforcement about their own boss on September 30, 2020, and put it in writing the next day.[6][7]
"We have a good faith belief that the attorney general is violating federal and/or state law including prohibitions related to improper influence, abuse of office, bribery and other potential criminal offenses."
The October 1, 2020 letter, signed by seven senior officials of the Texas Attorney General's office[6]A week later, five of them wrote to Paxton directly:
"It would be a violation of our own public responsibilities and ethical obligations to stand by while the significant power and resources of the Texas Attorney General's Office are used to serve the interests of a private citizen bent on impeding a federal investigation into his own alleged wrongdoing and advancing his own financial interests. We urge you to end this course of conduct immediately."
Ryan Bangert, Blake Brickman, Lacey Mase, Darren McCarty and Ryan Vassar — October 7, 2020[7]Who signed: Jeff Mateer, First Assistant Attorney General. Ryan Bangert, Deputy First Assistant. Blake Brickman, Deputy AG for Policy and Strategic Initiatives. Lacey Mase, Deputy AG for Administration. Darren McCarty, Deputy AG for Civil Litigation. Mark Penley, Deputy AG for Criminal Justice. Ryan Vassar, Deputy AG for Legal Counsel. David Maxwell, Director of Law Enforcement and a former Texas Ranger.[6][8]
"Despite the effort by rogue employees and their false allegations I will continue to seek justice in Texas and will not be resigning."
Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General — October 2020[9]The deputies' complaint centered on Paxton's dealings with Nate Paul, an Austin real estate investor whose home and office had been raided by the FBI in 2019, and whose lawyers had given Paxton's campaign $25,000 in 2018.[53]
Two things about that relationship are plain documented fact. Paxton's office — which employs roughly 750 attorneys — instead hired Brandon Cammack, an outside lawyer five years out of law school with no prosecution experience, recommended by Paul; Cammack then issued grand jury subpoenas targeting Paul's adversaries.[54] And Paul himself pleaded guilty in January 2025 to making false statements to a financial institution, drawing four months of home confinement and a $1 million fine.[55]
Beyond that, the specific favors — the open-records interventions, the rushed legal opinion, the home renovations — are allegations set out in the articles of impeachment, and the Texas Senate acquitted him of all of them. We list them as allegations because that is what they are. Paul's own conviction had nothing to do with Paxton.
Mateer resigned. Brickman and Mase were fired. Vassar, Penley and Maxwell were put on leave and terminated. Bangert and McCarty resigned.[8] Four sued under the Texas Whistleblower Act.
In February 2023 Paxton agreed to settle for $3.3 million. The agreement required his office to retract the "rogue employees" release and state that it "accepts that plaintiffs acted in a manner that they thought was right and apologizes for referring to them as 'rogue employees.'"[10] The Legislature refused to fund it. House Speaker Dade Phelan: "I don't think it's proper use of taxpayers' dollars."[11] That refusal is what triggered the investigation that led to his impeachment.
The case went on. In November 2024 the Texas Supreme Court ruled he could be required to sit for a deposition. Rather than answer questions under oath, his office conceded the factual allegations. On April 4, 2025, Judge Catherine Mauzy entered judgment for the four whistleblowers — about $6.6 million. He announced an appeal, then dropped it on July 3, 2025.[12][13]
"It should shock all Texans that their chief law enforcement officer, Ken Paxton, admitted to violating the law."
Tom Nesbitt, attorney for the whistleblowers[12]"To avoid answering questions under oath about his corruption, Ken Paxton surrendered to the whistleblowers in the trial court and consented to judgment."
TJ Turner and Tom Nesbitt, attorneys for the whistleblowers — July 2025[13]A detail we could not have made up. In July 2025 — two years after the settlement in which his office formally apologized for the phrase — a Paxton spokesperson described the judgment as a "bogus judgement in support of baseless claims by rogue employees."[13]
Where it stands: as of the most recent reporting, the Legislature has not appropriated the money. Left unpaid into 2027, the judgment accrues roughly $1.2 million more in interest.[13]
These are not our characterizations. Each is sworn testimony given at his impeachment trial by a person he hired, quoted verbatim.
I told him that all you're doing is using the power and the prestige of this office for your own purpose, and I'm not going to allow that.
Mr. Paxton was engaged in conduct that was immoral, unethical and I believed it was illegal.
I believed that I was witness to criminal activity that had occurred by General Paxton.
I was apoplectic. I was furious that this was going on, and that the attorney general was allowing it.
He ended my career.
The fact that sixteen Republican senators were okay with this blatant corruption is outrageous and a stain on the Republican Party.
Sworn testimony is a record of what the witness said, not a finding that it was true. The Texas Senate acquitted him. We note that plainly below, and we'd note it here too.
On May 27, 2023, a Republican supermajority in the Texas House impeached a Republican attorney general on 20 articles. The vote was 121–23. Sixty Republicans voted yes — roughly half the GOP caucus. Every one of the 23 no votes was a Republican. It was the first impeachment of a Texas statewide official since 1917.[18][19]
The Republican-led General Investigating Committee that recommended it voted 5–0, all three of its Republicans included.[20] The articles included two counts of constitutional bribery, obstruction of justice, false statements in official records, and one titled simply "Unfitness for Office."[21]
"He put the interest of himself above the laws of the state of Texas."
"No one person should be above the law. We should not ignore it and pretend it didn't happen."
Rep. David Spiller, Republican of Jacksboro, on the House floor[18][22]"The evidence is substantial. It is alarming and unnerving."
"He has betrayed us and the people of Texas."
Rep. Andrew Murr, Republican of Junction, chair of the House General Investigating Committee[23][24]"I believe threatening witnesses, threatening people before their vote is against the law."
Rep. Charlie Geren, Republican of Fort Worth, on Paxton telephoning House members ahead of the impeachment vote[25]"Each of these four men is a conservative Republican civil servant. Interviews show that they wanted to be loyal to General Paxton and they tried to advise him well, often and strongly, and when that failed each was fired after reporting General Paxton to law enforcement."
Erin Epley, lead counsel to the Texas House General Investigating Committee[20]The Texas Senate acquitted him on September 16, 2023, on all 16 articles brought to trial. No article reached the 21 votes required; the highest was 14. His wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, was barred by Senate resolution from voting. Only two Republican senators voted guilty on any article: Robert Nichols and Kelly Hancock.[26]
An acquittal is an acquittal. It is also true that 60 Republicans in the House had already voted to send him there.
"Senator Cornyn has said that character is on the ballot in this runoff and we are educating Texas GOP voters about Ken Paxton's mismanagement of his office, his personal enrichment, his indefensible behavior and his disqualifying judgment in child sex abuse cases."
Matt Mackowiak, senior adviser to the John Cornyn campaign[27]"The strategy speaks for itself: Ken Paxton is a bad guy, an attorney general who broke the law, who has serious personal issues and flaws that I think most Texans find repulsive."
Aaron Whitehead, executive director of Texans for a Conservative Majority, a pro-Cornyn super PAC[27]"We will have an election day massacre. If Ken Paxton is at the top of the ticket, we risk losing the Senate seat, losing the majority in the House of Representatives."
Sen. John Cornyn, Republican of Texas[27]Pro-Cornyn forces outspent Paxton roughly four to one in the runoff. He won it anyway, 63.8% to 36.2%, becoming the first challenger to unseat a sitting Texas senator since 1970.[28]
Dan Cogdell defended Ken Paxton in his felony securities fraud case and at his impeachment trial — and won both. On June 8, 2026, he endorsed Democrat James Talarico for the United States Senate.[56][57]
"I defended Ken Paxton for years in the impeachment trial and in state criminal cases. But in my view, respectfully, I think Ken has lost sight of his core mission, which is to represent the people of Texas."
Dan Cogdell, Paxton's defense attorney[56]"I worked my ass off for the man for nine years. But that's a different inquiry. My obligation to Ken ended at the courthouse steps and my obligation as a citizen is to do what I think is the right thing."
Dan Cogdell[57]This is the same lawyer who, when the securities charges were dismissed, said: "At the risk of throwing my shoulder out of socket patting myself on the back, I'm proud to say that the decade long saga of the trials and tribulations of Ken Paxton ended today."[58] He is not a man with a grudge about the outcome. He won.
Paxton's campaign had an answer, and it isn't nothing:
"Dan is a Democrat and voted in the Democratic primary in 2024. Why is anyone shocked?"
Paxton campaign aide[56]That's accurate. Cogdell is a registered Democrat and did vote in the 2024 Democratic primary — though he has said he has historically given more money to Republicans than Democrats.[57] And Tony Buzbee, who led the impeachment defense, publicly said he still supports Paxton.[57] Take all of that into account.
Then notice what the rebuttal doesn't touch: a man spent nine years and two trials as Ken Paxton's lawyer, learned more about these facts than almost anyone alive, kept him out of prison — and decided the right thing to do was campaign against him.
"If you voted for John Cornyn, you have a place in this campaign. If you're a Republican tired of corruption you're seeing in government, you have a place in this campaign. Even if you're Ken Paxton's impeachment lawyer, you have a place in this campaign."
James Talarico, accepting the endorsement[56]| Item | Amount | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Whistleblower judgment Four fired senior deputies, April 2025. Paxton conceded the facts rather than be deposed, then dropped his appeal.[12][13] |
$6,600,000 | Owed by the state. Not yet appropriated. Accrues ~$1.2M more in interest if unpaid into 2027. |
| Securities fraud restitution Paid under a March 2024 pretrial diversion agreement, three weeks before trial, nine years after indictment.[29][30] |
$271,000 | Paid. Charges dismissed June 2025. No plea, no conviction. |
| Community service & ethics education Also required by the same agreement.[29] |
100 hrs + 15 hrs |
Completed. |
| Texas State Securities Board fine May 2014 reprimand for soliciting investment clients without registering, for a 30% commission, in 2004, 2005 and 2012.[31] |
$1,000 | Paid. His spokesman called it "an administrative oversight." |
| Total, before counting the impeachment | $6,872,000 | Most of it still owed by Texas taxpayers. |
On the securities case, precisely: he was indicted in July 2015 on two first-degree felony counts of securities fraud and one third-degree count of failing to register. He was never convicted of anything. After nine years of venue and prosecutor-pay fights, the charges were resolved by a pretrial diversion agreement and formally dismissed in June 2025.[29][30][32] Anyone who tells you he is a convicted felon is wrong, and we would rather be right than loud.
"There will never be a conviction in this case nor am I guilty."
Ken Paxton, March 2024[30]"no one is above the law and no one is beneath it"
Brian Wice, special prosecutor[30]Reporting by The Texas Newsroom found Paxton failed to disclose at least 10 properties across five states — Florida, Hawaii, Oklahoma, Utah and a previously unknown 42-acre parcel in Johnson County — on his Texas Ethics Commission personal financial statements. The Ethics Commission subsequently adopted a new rule on disclosing property held in blind trusts. In his 2025 filing, he disclosed eight properties for the first time.[33]
"I've disclosed everything I'm required to disclose."
Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General[33]ProPublica and The Texas Tribune reported in July 2026 that Paxton remained registered to vote at the Collin County home he had moved out of in June 2024 — the move-out date comes from Angela Paxton's own divorce filing — and that reporters linked him to a Denton County home as of February 2026, including mail addressed to "Warren Paxton" at the property.[34]
He voted six times in two years from the Collin County address, including the March 2026 Republican primary and the May 2026 runoff that made him his party's nominee for the United States Senate.[34]
"it is illegal to misrepresent your residence on election records or to establish a residence for the purpose of influencing the outcome of an election"
"You must register to vote using the address where you reside."
Voter guidance published by the Office of the Attorney General of Texas[34]To be scrupulous: Texas law does let a voter stay registered at a former address if the absence is temporary and they intend to return — the rule that lets college students and service members vote from home. Whether it applies here has not been decided by anyone. He has not been charged with anything, and no finding has been made. What we have is what reporters documented and what election lawyers said about it.
"I think there would be questions raised about a residence where someone does not live, does not spend the night and can in no way have the intent to continue to reside. Those would probably raise red flags in any state."
"the chief law enforcement officer of the state of Texas, someone who has made claims about election integrity and made it a priority of his office, should be charged with knowing the laws of residencies of the state of Texas with regard to voting."
David Becker, former U.S. Justice Department voting rights lawyer, director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research[34]"So long as you truly intend to return, I think you're fine. When you start doing things that suggest, 'Oh, I've fully moved. I'm just wink-wink saying I intend to return,' that's when you get into questionable territory."
Beth Stevens, election lawyer, formerly of the Harris County clerk's office and the Texas Civil Rights Project[34]The Collin County Democratic Party filed a complaint with the Texas Secretary of State on July 16, 2026. A spokesperson for that office explained the standard procedure: state law requires the Secretary of State to promptly refer a complaint to the attorney general where there is reasonable cause to suspect criminal conduct.[35]
We are a satire website and we could not improve on this.
Not a campaign's characterization. Not an opponent's press release. Findings by federal judges, one of them this summer.
Paxton opened a consumer-fraud investigation days after the group published a story about advertisements appearing on X. A unanimous panel ruled against him in an opinion by Senior Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards, citing uncontested evidence that the group was the target of a government campaign of retaliation.[39]
"Such a campaign of retaliation in response to appellees' exercise of their First Amendment rights reflects concrete and present harm."
Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit[39]He sued the Democratic fundraising platform the day after his own general-election opponent posted a record fundraising day. U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns enjoined him from proceeding.[40][41]
"The lawsuit was filed in retaliation for (and in an attempt to suppress) ActBlue's efforts to fund Talarico's campaign."
"the timing of events alone speaks volumes about Paxton's underlying motivation"
U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns[40][41]Stearns noted the investigation had "sat dormant for more than a year and a half, until the day after Talarico announced his fundraising results," called the evidence of bad faith overwhelming, and referred to Paxton's "well-known history of filing retaliatory lawsuits."[40][41]
Under the Texas Public Information Act, any agency that wants to withhold records must ask the attorney general for permission. He has run that office since 2015.
On January 13, 2022, Jackie Wood, Director of Public Integrity and Complex Crimes for the Travis County District Attorney's office, delivered a letter finding that Paxton's office violated the Public Information Act by withholding communications and claiming attorney-client privilege improperly — quoting his own office's Public Information Handbook back at him. His office called the finding meritless. The DA ultimately did not sue, because journalists would not testify.[42][43]
"I'm supposed to tell you not to do that. Depends who the reporter is!"
Marc Rylander, then communications director for Attorney General Ken Paxton, recorded at a 2017 training session when asked about expediting records requests from journalists[44]"use the process as a weapon rather than using the process as intended"
Katherine "Missy" Cary, former director of the Texas attorney general's open records division under four attorneys general, on how officials use the referral process[44]In June 2025 the Texas Supreme Court held in Paxton v. American Oversight that district courts have no jurisdiction to issue mandamus against constitutional executive officers — only the Supreme Court may.[45] Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock: "We are under no obligation, of course, to maximize the scope of the PIA's remedies."[45]
The Commission for Lawyer Discipline sued Paxton in 2022 over his lawsuit seeking to overturn the 2020 presidential election in four states, alleging conduct involving dishonesty or misrepresentation. It ended in February 2025 — but not on the merits. The Texas Supreme Court had held in a parallel case that bar discipline for statements in pleadings filed on the State's behalf violates separation of powers.[46][47]
No court ever ruled on whether his election claims were true. The case was resolved on who gets to police the attorney general, and the answer was: not the State Bar.
Covered above. Returned after a deputy called.[1][2]
A process server tried to serve Paxton at his McKinney home with a subpoena to testify in a federal case brought by abortion funds. From the server's sworn affidavit — the capitals are his:[48]
"I walked up the driveway approaching Mr. Paxton and called him by his name. As soon as he saw me and heard me call his name out, he turned around and RAN back inside the house through the same door in the garage."
"A few minutes later I saw Mr. Paxton RAN from the door inside the garage towards the rear door behind the driver side."
Ernesto Martin Herrera, process server, sworn affidavit filed in federal court[48]Paxton left in a truck driven by his wife. Herrera left the papers on the ground. Paxton's explanation was that "a strange man came onto my property at home, yelled unintelligibly, and charged toward me," and that the server was "lucky this situation did not escalate further or necessitate force."[49]
Two days later, The Texas Tribune published the emails. His office had been asked three days in advance to accept service:[50]
"I assume you'd like for us to serve that through you, but will you please confirm by noon today that you will accept service"
Elizabeth Myers, attorney for the plaintiffs, to the Office of the Attorney General — Friday, September 23, 2022[50]"But under no circumstances will we agree to have the sitting Attorney General testify in court"
Christopher Hilton, Assistant Attorney General — 9:45 a.m. Monday, while service was being attempted[50]A judge ordered him to testify anyway.[51]
Ordered by the Texas Supreme Court to sit for questioning in the whistleblower case, his office instead conceded the allegations, producing a $6.6 million judgment against the state without him ever answering a question under oath.[12][13]
The security tray is not a communal supply closet. It is a tray. Treat items in it as belonging to the person who set them down forty seconds ago.
Never let your Montblanc enter a government building alone. Pens travel in pairs. Pens file reports. Eight of them once filed the same one.
A pen engraved with your full legal name and the words "AND I WILL NOTICE" has a documented 100% recovery rate on this website.
Carry one chewed ballpoint in the outer pocket as a sacrificial offering. Nobody has ever been filmed leaving a courthouse with a chewed ballpoint.
Radical proposal: if you would like a pen, you may say "may I borrow a pen," and a stranger will simply hand you one. This works statewide and requires no legal opinion.
The most durable form of pen insurance is a general election. One is scheduled for November 3, 2026.[28] Bring your own pen. Register at the address where you actually live.
No. It is aggressively not. This site is made by people who oppose him, it says so at the top, the bottom, and now here in the middle. There is no link to his campaign anywhere on this page, and nothing here is authorized by him, his campaign, or any committee.
Here is the careful version: video shows him taking it, a deputy contacted him, he gave it back, his office called it a mistake, and no charges were filed.[1][2][4] The name of this website is a joke, an opinion, and a political argument. It is not a criminal finding, and we are not a court. Not even a Collin County one.
No, and you should stop anyone who tells you otherwise. He was indicted on three felony counts in 2015 and never convicted. The charges were resolved by a pretrial diversion agreement in 2024 and dismissed in 2025.[29][30] He was impeached by the Texas House and acquitted by the Texas Senate.[26] The federal corruption investigation ended when the Justice Department declined to prosecute in the final weeks of the Biden administration; according to the Associated Press, a senior career official in the Public Integrity Section recommended declining over concerns about securing a conviction, and political appointees were not involved.[52] A declination is not an exoneration, but it is also not a conviction, and we are not going to pretend otherwise to win an argument.
Don't. Check the footnotes. Every factual claim on this page links to the Texas Tribune, ProPublica, the Associated Press, a court opinion, or a legislative record. We deliberately left out several claims circulating about him — including one the AP itself retracted — because a site that gets one thing wrong hands him the other forty.
A retracted Associated Press claim about homestead exemptions. An affair story sourced to a single tabloid. Allegations from impeachment filings that were never proven and on which he was acquitted. His divorce, which is his family's business. Donation patterns that look suggestive but prove nothing. If we wouldn't want it used against someone we liked, it isn't here.
It doesn't. It's just the version that fits on a bumper sticker. The pen is how you got here; the eight deputies, the 121–23 vote, the $6.6 million, and the two federal judges are why the site is this long.
You may not. But you may have the idea, the format, and our sincere encouragement to register something similar about a public official of your choosing — so long as you keep the facts sourced and the jokes clearly jokes.