Talk:Ken Paxton

Alleged mortgage fraud

I skimmed Paxton's Wikipedia article and didn't see anything about this:

NYT: Ken Paxton Claimed Three Houses as His Primary Residence, Records Show

"Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas and his now-estranged wife, Angela, declared three separate Texas homes as their primary residence in mortgage documents, according to records obtained by The New York Times.

"The possible misrepresentation could have allowed the couple to secure more favorable loan terms and save hundreds of thousands of dollars.

"The issue, first reported by The Associated Press, emerged on Thursday, two weeks after his wife, a state senator, filed for divorce, accusing him of adultery, and a little more than three months after Mr. Paxton announced that he would challenge Senator John Cornyn in what could be the Republican primary season’s toughest, most expensive race in 2026."

Some of the content from this New York Times piece should probably be added to the Wikipedia article. 172.56.10.53 (talk) 04:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC) 172.56.10.53 (talk) 04:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

References

I'm not a fan of this guy either but there's gotta be a better picture out there

I'm not really sure what we can and can't use for a picture but there's gotta be something that's better than what we have now Terraviridian (talk) 04:31, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Texas Government Sec. 711

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 January 2026 and 8 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jaeeeee23 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dr. Misty (talk) 21:56, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Texas attorney general under scrutiny over hotel room payments

"Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office is under scrutiny after agency employees reallocated taxpayer-funded hotel rooms to donors and other private citizens, some of whom failed to cover the cost of the stay until the state comptroller began auditing the agency's finances earlier this year." Klibanoff, Eleanor (2026-04-02). "Texas attorney general under scrutiny over hotel room payments". The Texas Tribune. Retrieved 2026-04-03. Selbstporträt (talk) 16:01, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Problematic editing behavior

Commentary on editor behavior mostly unrelated to the article

User:HarvardJock recently reverted a series of 20 edits. Some of those 20 edits were made by me, while others were made by User:Quindraco. User:HarvardJock explained his/her edit with an edit summary that reads, "Unexplained removal of sourced content." This is simply not true. Every single one of my edits was explained. I attempted to reinstate the 20 edits, only to be reverted by User:JanManisijun, who made the same inaccurate claim in his/her edit summary. If the two of you have a problem with the edits made by User:Quindraco, you should revert those edits and leave mine out of it. If you have a problem with my edits, you should be honest about what the problem is instead of falsely claiming that I didn't explain them. Are we having a WP:OWN issue here? Regardless of what the issue is, please reinstate my edits. Thank you. ~2026-27450-84 (talk) 18:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I will take responsibility in that fact that I did not thoroughly check the contents that were revised, and assumed that User:HarvardJock was correct in their assessment of your review. At first glance, with all edits combined together, it appears as if you did in fact remove a lot of content without any reasoning.

However, as I am looking at the edit history, you and User:Quindraco made solid, acceptable edits for the page. In my personal opinion, these edits should be accepted since they did fairly good work at condensing the page without actually removing much content.

I will say that going forward I would add an edit summary explaining exactly what you had done, given you are a temp user and that half of the edits do not have a summary. I think this would help with people making glance assumptions on the constructiveness of your edits.

I am going to be WP:BOLD and restore the latest version of both of your edits, and make up from there.

If someone disagrees, please come here and further the discussion, thanks!

jan Manisijun ^{(talk | cont | sign)} 21:46, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking a second look and reinstating those edits. Much appreciated. ~2026-27450-84 (talk) 01:33, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Also described as far right and ultraconservative

• "First elected state attorney general in 2014, Paxton sought to position himself as a national leader on the far right, launching some of the first criminal investigations in the US over abortion bans and gender-affirming care for transgender youth." The Gaurdian 2026

• "It would take a case coming to the high court for this to happen, but Paxton, a far-right Republican, indicated he would get one started." Advocate 2022

• "Attorney General Ken Paxton defeated Sen. John Cornyn in the Senate GOP runoff Tuesday, cementing the influence of the far right in Texas and potentially putting the seat in play for November." Politico 2026

• "As Texas’ top lawyer, Paxton became a hero of the far right by using rapid-fire lawsuits to spearhead their most important causes, from expanding religious influence in schools to attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election." Politico 2026

• "Perhaps most strikingly, the billionaire West Texas oilmen and far-right kingmakers who have long supported Mr. Paxton have spent little on his Senate run." NYT 2026

• "Supported by the American president, ultraconservative Ken Paxton largely won the Republican senatorial primary against outgoing senator John Cornyn. A victory which worries even in the Republican ranks, due to the numerous legal scandals surrounding the Texan attorney general." La Depeche 2026

• "Stickland is the leader of Defend Texas Liberty, a political action committee that has donated millions of dollars to far-right candidates in the state. It is a key part of the constellation of political campaigns, institutions and dark-money groups that a trio of West Texas oil tycoons — Tim Dunn and brothers Farris and Dan Wilks — have pumped small fortunes into as part of a long-term crusade to push Texas to the extreme right. And, until last month, no state politician had received more money from those groups than Paxton..." Texas Tribune 2023

Cheers. DN (talk) 00:16, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Unjustified reverts

The following two edits were reverted by User:M.boli on a no-reason-given basis: and . It is difficult to infer what the problem might be. The revert of the first edit is especially mystifying; I removed a list that summarizes each one of the 20 articles of impeachment issued against Paxton in 2023. The inclusion of endless lists like this one is part of the reason so many Wikipedia pages are overly long and unreadable. Brevity is a good thing. I propose to reinstate both edits. At the very least, the first one should be reinstated. User:M.boli, if you disagree, please explain yourself. ~2026-24307-27 (talk) 20:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I call hooey.

• This edit greatly trimmed down the summary of the impeachment from the lede:

gave preferential treatment to a political donor who bribed him, misapplied public resources and made false statements against whistleblowers, obstructed justice in the securities fraud trial against him, and made false statements regarding his financial interests -> abused his office, engaged in bribery, and obstructed justice

• The edit in the lede about the securities fraud was factually incorrect. It was not events that occurred during his campaign for attorney general, Paxton did it years earlier. Incorrectly tying the alleged fraud to the campaign leaves an impression this was political stuff.
• Showing up in the middle of Paxton's campaign and removing the details about his famous impeachment on the grounds that Wikipedia pages are overly long doesn't pass the smell test.

Trimming and softening the presentation of Paxton's legal problems in the lede at the same time the indictment details are removed from the body of the article further weakens the sincerity of the overly long arugment. I call hooey. -- M.boli (talk) 13:05, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining your reverts. You should have done that in the first place. It was obnoxious of you not to.

The one thing you said that wasn't complete BS was the comment about the securities fraud issue. I didn't read the cited source carefully enough, and I believe you were actually right.

Everything else you said was complete BS. I do not appreciate the POV accusation, and it is a crock. I am an independent voter, I do not live in Texas, I have nothing to do with Ken Paxton or his campaign, I believe him to be a complete sleaze, and I am disappointed that he defeated John Cornyn. You need to strikethrough your BS accusation. Per WP:AGF, you had no right to make it.

Once you're done doing that, you need to reinstate my first edit where I trimmed out the endless list of all 20 impeachment accusations. I will say it again: "The inclusion of endless lists like this one is part of the reason so many Wikipedia pages are overly long and unreadable. Brevity is a good thing." ~2026-24307-27 (talk) 02:27, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I am also currently opposed to this change. While brevity is good, there is much WP:WEIGHT among RS regarding Paxton's impeachment. It was widely covered at the time and may be one of the more notable things about Paxton. Afterall, he is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE. It is likely there is room for improvement as to how the charges are presented, perhaps a WP:Hatnote or something similar? That said, I do not agree with 2026-24307-27's recent attempt to address that possible issue. I suggest trying a different proposal and approach. Cheers. DN (talk) 03:50, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Where does this fit in the article?

https://www.sacurrent.com/news/texas-news/ken-paxton-caught-on-video-jetting-off-to-european-vacation-with-alleged-mistress/ — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 21:56, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

If there is enough WEIGHT for inclusion, most likely under the Personal Life section, possibly in subsection "Estrangement, affair, divorce". Cheers. DN (talk) 17:14, 2 July 2026 (UTC)