MaxThreshold
Footballguy
AnotherPerry's defense seems unbelievably simple to me:
He didn't believe that the woman was capable of leading that department and that her poor judgement and leadership compromised the entire department, in order to protect the taxpayers of Texas, he had a duty to use his powers to prevent a waste of taxpayer money and cut out a department that he believed was no longer able to function in the manner it was designed to.
I'm not saying that that was, or was not, his actual motivation, but I don't think there is any evidence against that. Viewed under that light, I can't see how this prosecution is even a little bit proper.
Just from a rational standpoint, ignoring any possible hidden motivations that we would just be guessing at, it would seem that Perry was the one person that used what tools he had to remove someone from their position that quite obviously didn't belong there. A DUI for someone with her position was bad enough, but her behavior afterwards goes beyond the pale. She was absolutely wrong to not resign. Her superiors were then absolutely wrong to not fire her from her position. Perry gave her an opportunity to do the right thing and resign and she refused once again. So he did what he had to do to get rid of someone that wasn't fit to do their job.
I'm sure that my political bias is informing this next thought, but I feel like if a Perry was a Democrat and the woman was a Republican, that Perry would be being portrayed in the media as a hero for getting rid of a vile and incompetent Republican, while the press screamed about the partisan witch hunt against him.
This is nothing other than a witch hunt by the Democrats.