Paul took a polygraph test, said he did not drink on the job -- and passed, Pleban says.
"That allegation goes back to the summer of 2012. I can't imagine for the life of me, if somebody is drinking alcohol in the summer of 2012, why it would be coming out now almost a year later other than the purpose of running him out of office," he adds.
City Attorney Paul Martin told the Post-Dispatch that those charges were dropped because drinking alcohol and swearing are not impeachable offenses. (Martin did not return Daily RFT's request for comment yesterday).
While those charges were removed from the formal motion to impeach Paul -- who was suspended in the meantime -- a great deal of other accusations remain, some of which include somewhat wonky charter rule arguments.
Pleban says that when Paul originally campaigned, he ran on a platform against a Walmart development -- and that the backlash he is facing now is political. With City Council elections next month, Pleban says, his opponents want to oust him before there may not be enough members who oppose him due to term limits. (If he's not impeached, Paul's term will continue past the election).
There will be an impeachment hearing on March 27 on this matter, which is a civil administrative case.
One of the complaints that Pleban says is the most absurd is an allegation that he requested that "as mayor, he be issued a gun and a badge."
"The mayor asked if he got a badge and a gun...because he did not want a badge and a gun," Pleban says, explaining that he and his family wanted to make sure he wasn't going to bring home a gun.
He adds, "It's not more of an impeachable offense than flying to the moon."
Here's the City Council document that includes the impeachment accusations.
Send feedback and tips to the author. Follow Sam Levin on Twitter at @SamTLevin.
