mr. paxton himself filed, the memorandum which is exhibit a to mr. paxton's request doesn't validate the allegations made in the report. it's simply affirming and noticing that a report and a complaint was filed with the rent board by mr. paxton. that information was known to the board on april 25th when this matter was decided. mr. paxton testified to the fact that he had filed a report of alleged wrongful severance with the rent board. that was before the board. the fact he did acknowledge receipt of that information is not new information that would affect the outcome of the hearing. secondly, mr. paxton continues to take the position that the relocation of housing services that we proposed are not like kind and that they do constitute a severance of some of his housing services. that was discussed at both hearings before the board. it was discussed before the board that mr. paxton does have a remedy at the rent board if he believes that to be the case that he can file a petition to have his rent adjusted accordingly. not new information. that was

mr. paxton. >> john paxton, the appellant. good evening to the board commissioners. i did not see the new revised set of plans until this morning, and i've not had an adequate opportunity to review them. as a result, i cannot comment on them for three minutes. this is the second set of revised plans proposed to -- by the project applicant. the revision submitted at the hearing a month ago had most of the same errors and misrepresentations which existed in the original approved plans. upon a cursory review of the most recent set of plans, i see several items which cause me concern. for example, work would be done which would weaken two of the shear walls, and i see that no structural calculations have been included. i believe, however, the more definitive objective argument against the project is that the applicant cannot obtain a permit to add adu since the project takes away or severs space leased to me, and the landlord has not given notice that he is severing my use of part of the garage space and storage pursuant to one of the 16 just causes. in last month's hear

mr. paxton, your thoughts. >> well, obviously another horrific shooting in texas, our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and their families. it's just tragic that we're dealing with this again. >> harris: from a law enforcement point of view there's so many questions, attorney general, we want to ask. because we see the situation play out, now, seven times since the beginning of 2018. what can be done? you are at the top. what can be done? >> you know, there's often tooep talk about more regulation. this guy who was willing to kill people is not going to follow a gun regulation. you are going to have to defend schools. you have to make sure we have trained people in schools. churches, and maybe businesses. the only deterrent. that's the only way i think to stop this from happening, mitigate the damage. >> harris: interesting we had a guest on earlier who said that schools should permanently be in lockdown mode. he said too bad for the kids if they can't move around as much but that way you're in the mode where somebody really stands out if they're not part of the program. >> yeah,

mr. paxton, this is domestic terrorism. it is the same thing with the mcveighs and everybody else. they want to draw attention to whatever cause they're defending or standing for and they're going to do it m a way to get their fame through the media, through everybody else, and in this instance we have somebody that they can question and say, hey, where were you going with this. and put a rhyme or reason to it. >> harris: interesting point. some of these we have not, that person is deceased or maybe incapacitated mentally, who knows. each one has its own hallmark and everything is different. the reason i ask about the public is this, we as a wide republic are asked to do a lot with very little detail. when you talk with officials and they can't tell you about the suspect, the person of interest, i respect and understand the urgency with which they are working with information and don't want to necessarily put that in the layman's hands. but we're asked to do something, we need specifics. and even the attorney general says this is somewhat like what happened with the austin, texas b

mr. gore, let me quote ken paxton, the attorney general of texas, knowing the number of citizens in any district will help reduce voter fraud by providing a more complete picture of the eligible voters in a district. let's say there are 300,000 u.s. citizens in a districts and 350,000 turn out to vote in an election, we would know there's a problem. now, would you say, mr. gore, that voter fraud has occurred if more votes are cast than eligible voters? >> i think if you had accurate data about the number of eligible voters and registered voters and the number of votes cast, it would certainly raise a lot of concern if the turnout in a particular geographic area exceeded the number of eligible and registered voters. >> if you're a data collector, something is wrong with that scenario. >> sounds like it, as you outlined the hypothetical, congressman. >> would you say voter fraud has occurred if -- let me restate that. does the civil rights division ever tally the total number of votes cast in a precinct and compare it to the eligible voters in a precinct? >> we have sometimes looked at that data t

i want to bring in now texas attorney general ken paxton who is one of the guys leading this lawsuit. mreneral, thank you for being with us. fill me in on timing. you've been telling everyone you'd do this for a while. why now? >> we had an agreement that this would be rescinded. the administration agreed this needed to go away. we gave them six months because we wanted congress to work this out if the didn't happen and then of course federal judges came in from washington, new york, and california and blocked the president from rescinding what we believe is an unlandfall executive action by president obama. >> let me ask you this, because there is the head of, i believe, the mexican, american, caucus there in texas, legislative caucus who says you're actually focusing more on the politics and policy because if you want a change you try to work with congress to get something done. why is he wrong? >> well, it's good that he understands that this should go through congress. i'm glad that the representative does understand how the process works. but my job is not to make policy, my job is