KTBB News, Weather, Talk

AUSTIN — A real estate developer, whose relationship with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was at the center of the Republican’s historic impeachment trial in 2023 and a recently-ended federal corruption investigation, was sentenced Wednesday to five years’ supervised release and fined $1 million for lying to a financial institution.

Nate Paul, 38, was also ordered by U.S. District Judge David Ezra to serve four months’ home confinement at night, but he is allowed to leave for work and other appointments during the day. Paul had faced up to six months in prison under a previous plea agreement.

Paul’s attorney, Gerry Morris, did not immediately respond to emails requesting comment. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas declined comment.

Paul was accused by federal prosecutors of overstating his assets and understating his liabilities while seeking loans in 2017 and 2018.

Paul had claimed that federal investigators acted improperly when they raided his Austin home in 2019. He later sought help from Paxton, and the relationship and dealings between the two men played a prominent role in state lawmakers impeaching Paxton, who was later acquitted in the Senate.

Paxton has long denied wrongdoing and was not mentioned in federal indictments against Paul.

A close ally of President Donald Trump, Paxton is now running for U.S. Senate in the Republican primary against Sen. John Cornyn.

A separate federal criminal investigation of Paxton over his relationship and dealings with Paul was quietly ended by President Joe Biden’s administration in late 2024 with no charges. Paxton has called that investigation a “bogus witch hunt.”

Earlier this month, a state district judge awarded more than $6 million to four former Paxton aides who were fired in retaliation for reporting allegations that he was using his office to accept bribes from Paul.

AUSTIN – The Dallas Morning News reports A proposal to ban public school displays of unapproved flags is heading to the Texas House after passing the Senate on Tuesday in a 23-8 vote. Public schools would only be allowed to display a dozen specific flags, including those of the United States, Texas, the armed forces, flags representing colleges and universities, a school’s official flag and flags that are temporarily displayed as part of required class curriculum. The list of approved flags do not include flags representing LGBTQ pride or transgender people. If enacted, schools that violate the bill and fail to report a remedy within a certain timeframe would be subject to a $500 daily fine. Shortly before the vote, Sen. Molly Cook, D-Houston, told her colleagues she would oppose the bill because it targets LGBTQ students and teachers.

“It’s truly devastating to me that this bill fails to distinguish between messages of hate and those of community,” Cook said on the Senate floor. “If pride flags are political, then so are the values of respect and belonging. Our students deserve better than a false neutrality.” In a committee report released earlier this month laying out the bill’s intent, Sen. Donna Campbell, R-New Braunfels, said her proposal addresses concerns over political or ideological classroom displays — such as pride flags, Confederate flags, Blue Lives Matter flags and Black Lives Matter banners — that have led to administrative bans, protests and lawsuits. Campbell cited as an example a North Texas high school where students staged a walkout after administrators removed rainbow “safe space” stickers and pride flags. “Similar incidents across the state illustrate the divisiveness and disruption that competing political symbols can generate in school settings,” Campbell wrote. “S.B. 762 ensures schools prioritize education and shared civic values by establishing a uniform standard that prevents political symbol conflicts, maintaining a neutral learning environment.”

HOUSTON – The Houston Chronicle reports leaders of Texas ports and the companies that rely on the ports have spent the past two weeks of tariff upheaval doing what the ship captains do practically every minute of every day: Study the information and keep an eye on the horizon. The one thing they agree on is nobody really knows for sure what the conditions will be for very long at the 23 Texas ports that by many estimates generate more than one-quarter of the state’s gross domestic product. A few predict calm seas. Others see nothing but icebergs. More still cannot even predict what waves and thunderstorms lie ahead. “We’re trying to assess the situation,” Port of Freeport Executive Director Phyllis Saathoff told the crowd at a Greater Houston Port Bureau luncheon on April 10.

Despite the uncertainty of global trade markets as the Trump administration announces American tariff policy, then alters it, and then alters it again, port officials in Freeport and Houston have so far declined to elaborate on what immediate steps they are taking — including the possibility of slowing investment on their own docks or reducing their workforces. Citing the uncertainty and near-daily changes in what tariffs will be in effect and what specific goods will cost, they said it is too soon to either sound an alarm or give the all-clear. “Looking ahead, we will approach our work as we always have,” Port Houston public relations director Lisa Ashley said in a statement. Companies, however, are not waiting to take action, and have been doing so since before tariffs were even discussed, said Tim Sensenig, CEO of TMSfirst, a Spring-based transportation management company whose software helps companies with some 20 million shipments globally each day. Many companies — Sensenig noted the apparel industry — have already changed their patterns to get inventory moved in before tariffs can take effect. Others, such as Apple’s widely reported last-minute flight of Iphones, were temporary measures as they examined the long-term possibilities. “The last thing they want to do is be caught with their pants down with no inventory,” he said of retailers. Other sectors are taking more decisive steps. The impacts of proposed tariffs on auto imports and exports are already leading to layoffs at some automotive factories, as well as declines in the number of cars arriving at Texas ports.

AUSTIN – The Guardian reports that Donald Trump’s plans to expand infrastructure to produce artificial intelligence in the US could face years of delays with the Republican-controlled Texas statehouse poised to pass legislation that imposes regulatory hurdles on data centers. The Trump administration earlier this year announced that a joint venture called Stargate would construct a total of 20 data centers to provide computing power for AI as part of an effort to help the US compete against China for leadership of the technology and spur investors to pursue AI projects. The companies behind Stargate – OpenAI, SoftBank, Oracle and MGX, an investor backed by the United Arab Emirates, which together have pledged up to $500bn – chose Texas, with its loose regulation and pre-existing energy infrastructure for the first data center.

But the construction of future data centers to support Trump’s AI agenda faces headwinds as a result of the Texas legislation SB6, which introduces new regulatory measures including a six-month review process in addition to the existing 6-18 month evaluation period with the goal of protecting its own power grid in the face of storms. The effects of the proposed bill are two-pronged: the regulatory measures could result in a maximum 24-month approval process, while the requirement to pay additional fees to the Texas grid operator and install backup generators would dramatically raise construction costs. That could lead tech companies to scale back planned construction of data centers in the state, according to equity analysts. Stargate, for instance, has started building its first 10 data centers in Abilene, Texas, but it is unclear if the second set of 10 would be subject to the bill. And if tech companies do not build in Texas, they might not build the data centers at all, directly hampering Trump’s AI initiative. Other states, from Wyoming to Wisconsin to Tennessee, have courted those construction projects, but lack the infrastructure that exists in Texas.