“This is about a man who has no connection to my corner of the world attempting to impose his agenda on a crucial local race without any real understanding of how that will impact the people who have to live with the fallout.”

As we noted in 2018, leftist billionaire George Soros has been focusing his intricate web of foundations, super PACs, and assorted organizations on the nation’s District Attorney offices.

Since that time, Capital Research Center has done amazing work in uncovering the extent of Soros’ involvement in transforming our criminal justice system from the bottom up.

Financier and left-wing philanthropist George Soros contributed large sums to progressive candidates running for district attorney (DA) all around the country, apparently in hopes of changing the law enforcement system at the county or district level. Since 2015, he has spent more than $17 million on district attorney and other local races in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Arizona, but also in large, predominantly left-of-center states such as California and New York. In 2016, Soros dropped $2,000,000 into a single sheriff race in Maricopa County, Arizona, helping progressive candidate Paul Penzone win the election with ease over longtime incumbent Joe Arpaio. He has given millions of dollars in grants to candidates in several other counties as well. . . . . This effort has a clear motive, spelled out in a 2014 press release from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) after Soros’s Open Society Foundations contributed $50 million toward the Union’s Campaign to End Mass Incarceration, which is a part of their wider Smart Justice campaign. . . . . It seems that Soros decided his massive donation to the ACLU was not enough and started personally funding county prosecutor races. Critics of Soros’s efforts have raised the concern that such blind partisan funding can weaken the vetting process regarding the candidates’ characters. Some felt these concerns were documented when Robert Shuler Smith—a district attorney for Hinds County, Mississippi, whom Soros had backed—was tried in criminal court for two counts of suspected conspiracy to hinder prosecution and one count of suspected robbery, among other charges. As one reporter put it, “This isn’t about either of [the candidates] personally. This is about a man who has no connection to my corner of the world attempting to impose his agenda on a crucial local race without any real understanding of how that will impact the people who have to live with the fallout.”

As we noted in November 2019, one of the recipients of Soros’ backing is newly-elected San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin: San Francisco: Socialist Son of Imprisoned Weather Underground Terrorists Who Was Raised By Bill Ayers and Worked for Hugo Chavez Elected D.A.

Since his election, Boudin has fired seven of the district’s top attorneys, those who have built reputations as being “tough on crime.”

The Washington Times reports:

Chesa Boudin, San Francisco’s newest district attorney, the guy once referred to as “communist” by city sheriffs, kicked off his new law enforcement leadership role by, get this, firing seven of the community’s experienced prosecutors — the ones, notably, known as tough on crime. But it all makes sense. This is the city represented by none other than Speaker Nancy Pelosi — and Boudin, according to one past assessment, is practically a raging “communist.” . . . . Now Boudin’s won and taken office. And as one of his first official acts, he’s given the boot to those who would probably oppose his agenda.

Boudin claims he “had to make difficult staffing decisions in order to put in place a management team that will help me accomplish the work I committed to do for San Francisco.”

The Washington Times continues:

That’s code for: these guys aren’t aboard the social justice warrior bandwagon. They’re too law-and-order. So they gots to go, you see. The firings can’t be too much of a surprise. Boudin’s main platform, after all, was overhauling the status quo — and if that sounds familiar, it is. Hope and change, anyone? It worked for Barack Obama; it worked for Boudin. . . . . So now, somewhat expectedly, Boudin wants an end to “mass incarceration,” based on theories that the incarcerated are often, very frequently, no, wait, almost always behind bars because of the colors of their skin, rather than the deeds they did. Right? And he knows this to be true because his mom pleaded guilty to murder and robbery, and his dad was convicted of murder and robbery, and he visited them in prison numerous times. “My earliest memory,” he told NBC back in December, “is visiting [my parents] in prison. … Certainly, one lesson I learned is how … punitive it can be when your dad, arguably, was given an extra 55 years’ minimum sentence than your mother.” Sad childhood to the side, politically speaking: the incarceration of Boudin’s parents had to influence his soft-on-crime, sympathy-for-the-convicts approach to prosecutions. It had to play into the decision to let go some of the city’s most experienced prosecutors, including one, Mike Swart, who served or 10 years in the homicide unit. Boudin said he wants simply “to restore a sense of compassion” to the justice system, including for “the people who, themselves, have caused harm.” That’s nice. But tough on law enforcement, soft on crime isn’t that compassionate to the victims. Or to the cops. Or to the victims’ families and friends and loved ones. Or to the whole condition of right versus wrong.



