It is a known fact that Leftist billionaire George Soros, motivated by compassion for the “oppressed,” has financed the campaigns of a number of “progressive” D.A.s across the States in an effort to remedy what he sees as the racially motivated incarceration of an inordinately high number of Blacks. Larry Elder, of course, would respond that that statistic simply reflects the realities of Black criminal behavior.
Milwaukee County D.A. John Chisolm, in office since 2007, is one of said “progressives,” exalted repeatedly by the “liberal” media for his campaign to reduce the population of incarcerated Blacks by submitting them to significantly less onerous bail requirements than their White peers. It was as a result of his policies that Darrell Brooks was recently released on $1,000 bail in spite of repeated gun related offenses and refusals to honor the conditions of his bail. Pardon my language, but to anyone of intelligence, he was clearly an individual who simply didn’t give an F about the Rule of Law!
Embarrassingly exposed by the Waukesha massacre, Chisolm’s office issued a statement admitting it was wrong, given his record, to have released Brooks once again. But The Federalist today posted an article citing an interview the proudly “progressive” Chisolm gave to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in 2007 in which he said the following: “Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into a treatment program, who’s going to go out and kill somebody? You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach.”
So Chisolm and the “compassionate” Left clearly care more about the welfare of convicted criminals than that of law abiding Americans who are, the absurd cultural ethos of the day implies, mostly White Supremacists anyway. No doubt that’s how Darrell Brooks felt as he plowed through Waukesha’s flailing mass of “priviliged” human flesh. Given the frequency of violent crimes committed by individuals with lengthy criminal records, and they are fairly common in both Canada and the States, I cannot help but wonder how those responsible for their release would feel if one of their beloved children were to be among those slaughtered as a result of their “enlightened ideals.”
In the course of The Federalist article it is revealed that Chisolm had celebrated the wonderful bail reforms wrought by San Fransisco D.A. Chesa Boudin in his municipality. California’s Prop 47, as already discussed, increased from $450 to $950 the amount Californians could steal without being charged with a felony. Defenders of the legislation said it was in no way an invitation to increased criminal activity but simply an acknowledgement of the realities of inflation. Yet crime has demonstrably spiked in California which has seen approximately one million of its citizens leave in the recent past. Even the N.Y. Times, as cited in a previous blog, has admitted to the relative dysfunction of various Democratically run States, California among them.
Not surprisingly, this past weekend saw a crime spree in San Fransisco that was truly surreal, some 80 looters breaking into a Nordstrom outlet and marching off with thousands of dollars in plunder. Several major retailers, in response to the situation, have simply boarded up their San Fransisco sites! In an interview with the city’s CBS TV affiliate, Boudin argued that his policies had nothing to do with the chaos, indeed that similar outbursts had occurred in cities across the states. What he duplicitously failed to mention was that most of those cities were under the control of those who shared his very own political views. What was even more pathetic, however, was his claim that he was doing everything in his power to ensure the safety of his citizens, citing the fact that significantly more were being charged with criminal offenses under his watch than that of his 2019 predecessor. The irony of the fact that this was true precisely because he had allowed crime to surge radically out of control was apparently beyond his level of comprehension.
Legal policies which grant preferential treatment to a class of people based not on their character but the color of their skin are an insult to any person of intelligence. But so also are the Left’s approaches to border integrity, voter fraud, so-called social-economic equity, etc., etc., all of which simply ignore the basic realities of Human Nature. Given their inability to rationally defend their views on these issues, given the incriminating implications of the empirical evidence [i.e., cities infested with crime], name-calling would seem to be the only option left open to them [i.e., racist, elitist, White Supremacist, Neo-Nazi, etc., etc.]. Truly pathetic!