Democrats and the US mainstream media have insisted that tales of George Soros’ malign influence on US politics are conservative conspiracies. Americans targeted by prosecutors whose elections he financed can testify otherwise.
Take the case of two Californians who are facing ‘hate crime’ charges for painting over a Black Lives Matter mural outside the Contra Costa County courthouse during the Independence Day weekend.
This is being prosecuted; BML rioting is not
Nichole Anderson and David Nelson are being prosecuted by District Attorney Diana Becton, who described BLM as “an important civil rights cause that deserves all of our attention,” and insisted that “we must address the root and byproduct of systemic racism in our country.” A former judge with no prosecutorial experience and dogged by accusations of plagiarism, Becton was elected in 2018 thanks in no small part to $275,000 poured into her campaign by Soros.
The guy in front is buying the people who decide who gets prosecuted
The Hungarian-born Democrat mega-donor became obscenely wealthy through currency speculation, before turning his eye towards influencing politics. In addition to funding various Democrats in state and congressional races, Soros invested heavily in local elections, where his money could make a much bigger difference.
He specifically targeted district attorneys, who in the US make all the prosecutorial decisions on a local level. In 2018, he invested more than $2.7 million in DA races in California, according to the Los Angeles Times. This was on top of the more-than $16 million he spent since 2014 on 17 district attorney races across the US, with his candidates winning 13 of them. …
For years, Democrats have denounced ‘big money’ in politics. That rhetoric suddenly stopped once Soros became openly involved. Any time anyone brings this up, they denounce it as a “right-wing conspiracy theory” and even anti-Semitism – though the Israeli government begs to differ. Yet the proof of the pudding is in selective prosecutions, driven by racial grievance-mongering and intended to send a message to Americans that some people are, actually, above the law.
Selective enforcement of the law enables the left to commit political violence with impunity while prosecuting normals if they respond. Seen a lot of that lately in the US, as anti-white racism ramps up into de-facto apartheid.
Soros saw that opening before others and went for it, funding his folks into the positions that decide who to prosecute. Smart move, but too bad for the US (where local DAs are elected).
That selective enforcement is possible — instead of prosecuting all violations of the law — leads to corruption in enforcement and sloppiness and bloat in law making.
hat-tip Stephen Neil