NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, Texas — State Sen. Kelly Hancock, of North Richland Hills, one of two Republicans who voted to convict Attorney General Ken Paxton, says he focused on something different than some senators who voted to acquit.
Most senate Republicans say the impeachment case from the House of Representatives was rushed and weak. Judging by some of Hancock’s votes, he saw the case differently.
“I didn’t focus on that as much. I mean, I thought they sent over … I thought they sent over a sufficient amount of evidence,” Hancock says on Inside Texas Politics.
Hancock points out that the Senate vote doesn’t mean Paxton wasn’t guilty of the charges.
“People need to understand - acquittal doesn’t mean innocence. It could mean, in their opinion, insufficient evidence, it could mean reasonable doubt. There is a difference,” says Hancock.
Many of Hancock’s constituents support his decision. He has received more encouragement than he has had in 17 years. Hancock has been in the Senate since 2013. He served in the Texas House from 2006 to 2012.
Hancock also told Inside Texas Politics there was a lot of money and pressure put on the Senate jury – jury tampering.
“My phone blew up on the floor at one point. Filled up my text messages,” says Hancock.
He says that this pressure to influence Senators' decisions was made while Senators were supposed to be deliberating – an effort to tell them how to vote.
Hancock is up for reelection in 2026. He doesn’t fear that he’ll pay a political price in his district for his vote.
He credits this to the lesson learned from suffering from kidney disease for thirty years - to take things one day at a time.
“Just take it a day at a time, and when you live a day at a time, the most important thing to do is the right thing within the moment,” says Hancock.
During the trial, he didn’t worry about the next election. Instead, he worked as hard as he could to determine the truth - based on the evidence and testimony. He then came up with a decision - one that he could live with and properly represent his constituents.
Hancock said, since the House failed to come up with the results it was looking for, it could have done some things differently. For example, it could have presented key witnesses such as Paxton’s alleged mistress, Laura Olson. Paxton was accused of taking bribes to cover up an alleged affair with Olson. He denied wrongdoing.