Image 01 Image 03

George Soros Dumps Big Money Into U.S. District Attorney Races

George Soros Dumps Big Money Into U.S. District Attorney Races

“Soros has used his considerable finances and political clout to challenge district attorneys that do not fit into his progressive ideological agenda…”

“I have always harbored an exaggerated view of my self-importance. To put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god.”

– Billionaire Hedge Fund Operator George Soros, from his own book, “The Alchemy of Finance”


The man who broke the Bank of England, Democratic mega-donor George Soros, uses his wealth and influence in United States elections. Now Soros has moved his concentration to District Attorney races across the country.

Backed by millions in funding from billionaire Soros, the American Civil Liberties Union announced in April 2017 a campaign to target, remove, and replace pro-law enforcement, anti-illegal immigration district attorneys around the country. Described by the ACLU as “major drivers of mass incarceration, lacking accountability and transparency, and posing obstacles to criminal justice reform,” the ACLU received a $50 million grant from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations in 2014 to turn DA races, according to McClatchy News Bureau.

The Soros-funded California Justice and Public Safety PAC is invested heavily in the district attorney’s races in Sacramento, Alameda County, and San Diego. Newspapers describe Soros’ campaign funding as “part of a broader effort by the billionaire’s political organization to help progressive candidates running for district attorney across the nation.”

Soros spent $1 million against Bexar County Texas DA Nico LaHood who opposes sanctuary cities, The Daily Caller reported. Soros’ super PAC, Texas Justice & Public Safety, churned out attack ads against LaHood, accusing him of being racist.

“Soros has the routine down,” the Daily Signal reported. “He uses powerhouse Democratic law firm Perkins Coie to set up a super PAC named some variant of ‘Justice & Public Safety.’ The super PAC will surface late in a DA race, using the kind of capital typically reserved for a national political race to fund a series of attack ads benefitting Soros’ preferred candidate, who wins almost every time.” (Perkins Coie is the law firm that compiled the dubious Trump-Russia dossier.)

Philadelphia Justice and Safety, another of Soros’ super PACs, spent $1.6 million in Soros’ money pushing the progressive candidate in 2017.

Pushing “progressive” candidates who won’t seek death sentences, will ignore low-level drug crimes, and won’t imprison people who can’t make bail, is the platform Soros relies on the ACLU to identify. “The hedge-fund tycoon has spent about $10 million since 2015 to back progressive candidates for prosecutor in places as diverse as Chicago, Orlando, Houston, and Shreveport, La., through a network of affiliated super PACs, according to campaign-finance reports,” the Philly Inquirer reported.

Soros’ Florida PAC dropped $1.4 million for television ads in the final weeks of the campaign for progressive candidate Aramis Ayala, ensuring the ouster of the incumbent state attorney for Orange and Osceola Counties. When she took office Ayala immediately announced a moratorium on seeking the death penalty.

Soros was responsible for the defeat of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, spending a cool $2 million to oust the hard-nosed lawman, who fought illegal immigration.

Incumbents report that Soros’ massive infusion of campaign funds is smothering, and allows the progressive challengers to exponentially out-purchase radio and television advertisements, and flood the airwaves with last minute campaign messaging.

“Billionaire Social Activist George Soros has brought his war against law enforcement to San Diego and he’s spending more than $1 million to support anti-law enforcement candidate Genevieve Jones-Wright for District Attorney,” the website states, created by incumbent DA Summer Stephan. The website associates Soros with Antifa groups and anti-law enforcement groups – and is not a stretch in California.

At a recent news conference, “D.A. Stephan and supporters stood with community members and crime victims as they talked about the incumbent district attorney’s track record as victim’s advocate,” the San Diego UT reported. “Some held signs expressing opposition to Soros. One such sign said ‘Outside money doesn’t buy justice.’ Another said, ‘$oro$.’”

In my home town, a PAC controlled by Soros is funding the campaign of a leftist, anti-law enforcement deputy district attorney running to unseat Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert. Schubert’s challenger, Noah Phillips blames the fatal police shooting of career criminal Stephon Clark last March as evidence that Schubert, along with the rest of Sacramento County law enforcement, is racially biased.  Phillips has raised $750,000, thanks in large part to Soros, who paid for the political ads now running on TV.

One such commercial says, “We need to end racial profiling and police misconduct. And right now the system is broken.”

D.A. Anne Marie Schubert created a statewide law enforcement task force in 2016, which recently arrested the notorious “Golden State Killer,” also known in Sacramento as the “East Area Rapist.” And Schubert has a lengthy history of being tough on crime, wherever it takes her, which in Sacramento, CA, makes her a racist according to the Soros-funded left.

Why is George Soros Buying Democrat Politicians and DAs?

Soros has made personal campaign contributions to numerous Democrat politicians including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Charlie Rangel, Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore and many more. Additionally, in 2007 and 2008 Soros funded Green For All and the Ella Baker Center, from Soros’ main organization, the Open Society Institute. Van Jones who describes himself as a Communist, led  the leader these groups at that time.

According to a recent Association of Mature American Citizens articleWhy is George Soros Buying District Attorneys?, “Over the last few years, progressive billionaire George Soros has dumped millions of dollars into district attorney races around the country. Soros has used his considerable finances and political clout to challenge district attorneys that do not fit into his progressive ideological agenda including:”

2015, Scott Colom and Robert Shuler Smith, $400,000

2016, Andrew Warren, Hillsborough County, Fla.

2016, Kim Foxx, Cook County, Ill.

2016, Kim Ogg, Harris County, Texas $600,000

2016, Aramis Ayala, Orlando, Fla., $1.4 million

2017, Larry Krasner Philadelphia, Pa., $1.45 million

2018, Joe Gonzales Bexar County, Texas, $958,000

Should George Soros be determining the outcomes of District Attorneys races around the country? Why is George Soros Buying District Attorneys? And before we vote, we must ask ourselves why the American Civil Liberties Union is investing large resources and utilizing its organizational skills in local district attorney races this year.



Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Here is a case of collusion that even a caveman can understand it, as well as election interference by a wealthy individual who uses loopholes to give massive amounts of money to campaigns.

I don’t think PACs were meant to be one, or a small group, of individuals who look to inject millions into individual campaigns. His setting up of places like Media Matters and others of similar intent are propaganda machines. He has made it well known that he would love to see the US in ashes and brought under a One World Order.

Soros is an evil man. Too bad the US can’t prosecute him and RICO his vast fortune. His fortunes are based on fleecing others through the means he uses to influence markets. Some people of the correct political leanings are of course above the law.

    Tom Servo in reply to oldgoat36. | May 9, 2018 at 11:22 am

    I only disagree with one line of what you wrote.

    “I don’t think PACs were meant to be one, or a small group, of individuals who look to inject millions into individual campaigns.”

    I think PAC’s were ALWAYS meant to be exactly that. All of our campaign finance laws have been carefully constructed around 2
    goals: stop the public from ever understanding how any of it really works, and to enable wealthy individuals to give any amount of money they want to entrenched politicians, while providing a level of plausible deniability so that both donor and recipient can be shielded.

    and this is one of the few areas where every incumbent, republicrat and demmican, agrees that this is a “good” system that shouldn’t be changed.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Tom Servo. | May 9, 2018 at 1:01 pm

      Agreed! PACS are all about corruption of free peoples by Nazi individuals such as this one!

        You and I may disagree with him and his politics all we like, but you have no right to slander him by calling him a nazi. It’s a low, filthy tactic, no different from what the SJWs do.

          notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Milhouse. | May 9, 2018 at 7:43 pm


          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | May 9, 2018 at 8:29 pm

          Once again, you have no right to call him that. It’s a filthy slander, which you’re not entitled to make just because he has the wrong politics.

          Valerie in reply to Milhouse. | May 10, 2018 at 2:23 pm

          He has made no secret that he collaborated with the Nazis as an underage teen. Make of it whatever else you will, he did collaborate.

          Maybe he’s trying to make up for it, in his old age. I don’t know. I do know that he has been involved in actions that have had disastrous results for the countries he has tried to influence. He has a reverse-Midas touch. Considering that he also has made an enormous amount of money betting against various countries’ economies, and lost big when he didn’t get his candidate or policies in the US, I suspect ill-will rather than thwarted good intentions.

        No, he did not. That is a filthy lie that antisemites circulate. You should be ashamed of yourself for repeating it, especially on a Jew’s site.

    MSO in reply to oldgoat36. | May 9, 2018 at 12:58 pm

    Allowing elected officials to determine who, and under what circumstances, candidates may compete with them for the offices they hold is absurd.

    YellowGrifterInChief in reply to oldgoat36. | May 9, 2018 at 2:14 pm

    Loopholes are bad? Perhaps you should be railing against the President of the US. I guess you only dislike loopholes when they are used by people you don’t like.

    “Propaganda Machine”? That is in the eye of the beholder. Media Matters can hardly keep up with the puke you lap up with a soup spoon.

    Soros is an evil man. Too bad the US can’t prosecute him and RICO his vast fortune. His fortunes are based on fleecing others through the means he uses to influence markets.

    He is a capitalist. Are you a socialist or just an inconsistent silly old goat?

    Milhouse in reply to oldgoat36. | May 9, 2018 at 5:28 pm

    The first amendment is not a loophole.

Satan’s little helper.

It beats the Hell out of me why this SOB is not sitting in Supermax. Or even a naturalized citizen of this country.. He is a convicted felon in France on money laundering charges. By all rights, he should have been denied an entrance visa to start with.

    Tom Servo in reply to Stan25. | May 9, 2018 at 11:52 am

    Soros got his US citizenship in 1961. The official details are murky, but it isn’t much of a stretch to guess that he paid off the Kennedy administration to get it. He’s been very careful to continue bankrolling the Democrats ever since, and they in turn have always done everything they can to protect and enable him.

      YellowGrifterInChief in reply to Tom Servo. | May 9, 2018 at 2:18 pm

      Are they murkier than Trump’s finances?

      Your hypocrisy is rank.

      Milhouse in reply to Tom Servo. | May 9, 2018 at 5:34 pm

      Why on earth would he have to pay for naturalization? He got it the same way everybody else did. The same way you or your parents or grandparents got it.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Tom Servo. | May 9, 2018 at 7:49 pm

      You may remember this little bit of Kennedy history.

      “The Nazi ambassador subsequently told his bosses that Kennedy was “Germany’s best friend” in London.”

        YellowGrifterInChief in reply to notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital. | May 9, 2018 at 8:13 pm

        Why go back to before we entered WW II?

        Some Very Fine People on Both Sides

        Donald J. Trump

          You may remember this little bit of Kennedy history.

          How is that at all relevant? How does Joe K’s alleged sympathy for the nazis before the War relate in any way to Jack somehow having to be bribed so a perfectly ordinary Jewish immigrant could get naturalized just like tens of thousands of others who were indistinguishable from him and didn’t have to bribe anyone? This theory of yours is even more bizarre than most weird conspiracy theories, because it doesn’t explain anything, it only creates a mystery where none existed.

          Some Very Fine People on Both Sides

          There were some very fine people on both sides of that confrontation, just as there were some vicious thugs on both sides. It is just as absurd to suppose that every person protesting the removal of the statue was some sort of nazi as it is to suppose that every person rallying for the removal was a violent thug. If we are to suppose there were good people in the violent counterprotest, then it stands to reason there were good people in the peaceful protest.

    Milhouse in reply to Stan25. | May 9, 2018 at 5:33 pm

    A French conviction is not even a stain on anyone’s character. Especially a conviction on a supposed “law” that didn’t even exist when he’s alleged to have broken it. The French “justice” system is nothing like ours. You may as well cite someone’s conviction in China for breaking some supposed law the government decided to make.

Why is George Soros Buying District Attorneys?

That’s easy. It’s because he doesn’t want the hundreds of millions of dollars he invested in the Black Lives Matter movement to go to waste. What good is it to emasculate the police if you don’t also emasculate the prosecutors?

    Liz in reply to JPL17. | May 9, 2018 at 12:45 pm

    Don’t forget that the Ds have lost many local and state positions. These political levels are the training grounds for higher office. Rs have a better bench of people to call on for positions.

    By supporting the county DA positions, these progressives can impact the local as well as the national political picture – Tom DeLay comes to mind. Faster results instead of supporting a city council person who then moves up to a county and then a state level over a period of many years.

      JPL17 in reply to Liz. | May 9, 2018 at 2:02 pm

      Yes, weaponizing major DA’s offices against conservative politicians is certainly part of their plan as well.

Is Schneiderman an example of what Soros is buying?

JusticeDelivered | May 9, 2018 at 12:25 pm

Who is capable of countering Soro’s operations?

Isn’t that Black Liars Matter? There has been a pattern of blacks crafting false narratives about one case after another, and then getting media to push it. Thye have also been violating other people’s civil rights, with impunity under Obama and Holder. I had hoped that Sessions would address these issues, but am quite disappointed with him.

Soros is a little late, Spitzer, Weiner and Schneiderman have been taken off the table. He probably believes, correctly but sadly, that such a rich vein of candidates will produce even more.

@KatyGrimes, please consider rewriting the second sentence of the second paragraph.

“Described by the ACLU as…, the ACLU received…” makes no sense.

Thank you.

This is not new. Soros has been doing this for years.

YellowGrifterInChief | May 9, 2018 at 2:47 pm

Pushing “progressive” candidates who won’t seek death sentences

Exonerations of Innocent Men and Women. As of October 2015, we have executed over 1,414 individuals in this country since 1976. 2. 156 individuals have been exonerated from death row–that is, found to be innocent and released – since 1973.

will ignore low-level drug crimes

White or Black? ‘Cause the white guys are already being ignored. For all of them, do we want them in prison or in treatment?

won’t imprison people who can’t make bail

Why are we imprisoning the poor prior to conviction if they are at low risk to not show up for their court appearances and are not considered by the court to be a danger to the community? Isn’t that the purpose of bail? Are you in the employ of the Bail Bonds industry?

Are you aware of the abuses in the Bail Bonds industry? In one case a bondsman tried to have someone locked up after the charges had been dismissed because the bondsman was still owed installments (with interest rates that would make a loan shark blush). The sheriffs didn’t know what to do with guy and refused to incarcerate him.

    JohnSmith100 in reply to YellowGrifterInChief. | May 10, 2018 at 8:28 am

    “Exonerations of Innocent Men and Women.”
    “White or Black?”

    The longer the rap sheet, the less likely someone is credible and more likely they will be charged and convicted.

    Police give more attention to high crime areas, rightfully so.

    Black per capita rate of crime is over seven fold higher than white, most of which is by black males.

    They are not being arrested because of race, they are being arrested because of a consistently high crime rate.

    Need for a bail bondsman is mostly self inflicted. I bet that there is a really high default rate, and that means a high interest rate is needed to stay profitable.

    This is a problem that blacks need to fix for themselves. Parenting and culture need to be addressed for the good of the children.

It would be helpful if the GOP could provide a list of the Soros funded candidates circulated so that people could vote against them.

DeplorableLanie | May 9, 2018 at 7:32 pm

What happened to campaign donation limits? I thought we could only give so much to one candidate? How is it that he can give millions to the DNC and not go over the limits???

    Milhouse in reply to DeplorableLanie. | May 9, 2018 at 8:39 pm

    The DNC is not a candidate. And there isn’t and can’t be any limit on what people spend independently to persuade voters to their point of view, so long as it isn’t coordinated with the candidate.

      elle in reply to Milhouse. | May 10, 2018 at 12:22 am

      Another Milhouse moment. Unable to get past small details to engage the bigger picture.

      Random Poster: Milhouse! Your stove has caught fire!!
      Milhouse: Stoves do no burn, you idiot! Fool!

        Heh, this made me laugh because it captures Milhouse’s pedantry so well! Nothing against Milhouse, though, he must know this is a great caricature of some of his posts. 😛

        Milhouse in reply to elle. | May 10, 2018 at 3:45 am

        Not so. The whole point of DeplorableLanie’s comment rests on the restrictions that only apply and can only apply to actual candidates. The fact that the DNC isn’t one is therefore a key distinction, not some trivial detail. Congress can’t restrict donations to political organizations that aren’t earmarked for a specific candidate, because there is no compelling government interest in doing so, since such organizations aren’t subject to corruption in the way that candidates are.

          JohnSmith100 in reply to Milhouse. | May 10, 2018 at 8:33 am

          Gee, I think that Soros is corrupted. Look at how he makes, and how he spends the money. It seems to me that there is a rot on both ends of his dealings.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | May 10, 2018 at 1:50 pm

          He makes his money legally and honestly, and he spends it the same way any of us would if we had that kind of money — on furthering the political causes about which he feels passionately. That we disagree with those causes and think them harmful to the country and to the public is irrelevant; it makes him our opponent, not a criminal and certainly not the Devil.

I assume the purpose of buying district attorneys is to direct who and what will be (or won’t be) investigated and prosecuted.

    Milhouse in reply to randian. | May 10, 2018 at 3:49 am

    He’s not buying district attorneys. At most he’s buying district attorneyships for candidates whose thinking he likes. Those people are not beholden to him, and he doesn’t expect any favors from them, he just expects them to perform the way they campaigned, to carry out the pro-criminal and anti-police policies they truly believe in.

      94Corvette in reply to Milhouse. | May 10, 2018 at 10:22 am

      Here in Houston he contributed $600,000 to Karen Ogg in the last election cycle. Within the last few months a close friend of mine was assaulted while he was accompanying a 16 yo youth to an ‘alternative’ school. The youth beat him severely giving him three concussions and leaving him with PTSD and seizures which render him unable to drive or to work. Karen Ogg’s office did not let my friend know of the trial date for the youth, did not call him to allow him to testify on his behalf. This youth, with two prior convictions for assault and on probation, was had his sentence probated again. This is the kind of ‘justice’ that Soros wants. The bottom line is that the average US citizen once had comfort that the rule of law applied to all. Now, we’re seeing that it doesn’t. This distrust is just part of the plan the progressives have to destroy our country.

        Milhouse in reply to 94Corvette. | May 10, 2018 at 1:56 pm

        Indeed, that is the kind of policing he supports, and it’s wrong. But it does not support an allegation of corruption. He supports that level of policing for the same reason we support a very different one: because he thinks it right.

        He thinks it right and appropriate for the justice system to be biased in favor of defendants and against their alleged victims. Actually we do too; our constitution is very much based on that proposition. But we differ on how far it should be biased in that direction. He wants it to tilt a lot further for defendants than we do, and you correctly point out the awful results of that sort of policy, and why we think the bias should be a lot less pronounced. This doesn’t make him corrupt, it just makes him wrong (in our opinion).

    You are correct. The reason for buying DAs is the same as the state AGs who are lefties – they use the office to go after political enemies.

clayusmcret | May 10, 2018 at 6:48 am

Of course. He’s learned that regardless of what laws a state or local government create, unless the State AG or DA’s prosecute, the laws are meaningless. And in most cases, they cannot be compelled to enforce the law.