Alameda County DA Election Will Likely Draw More Soros Funding

For over five years George Soros has been laying siege to the U.S. justice system. In the past year, the Capital Research Center has exposed how Soros has used a vast network of political action committees (PACs) to spend over $29 million to elect two dozen radical left-wing district attorneys (DAs), and that these prosecutors are now in charge of protecting over 37 million Americans, or 11 percent of the entire U.S. population.

But the process of electing pet DAs has not been an easy one though. Many Soros-backed candidates have been rebuffed by more moderate and qualified opponents.

Alameda County

Now, one of Soros’s would-be DAs is gearing up to take another swing.

In 2018, Pamela Price ran for District Attorney in Alameda County, California, and was defeated by the incumbent, Nancy O’Malley. During her campaign Price received support from the Soros-funded California Justice and Public Safety PAC, to which Soros has contributed $6.1 million since 2018. California campaign finance disclosures show that the PAC spent a total of $699,647 in support of Price. Meanwhile, Price’s PAC raised just $326,798 during the entire 2018 cycle, meaning Soros spent over double the funds Price was able to raise organically, making Soros the largest spender on the election by far, even though he does not live in Alameda County.

Pamela Price has since announced that she is running for DA again in 2022 and given the strong possibility that Soros funding will again make an appearance, it’s worth revisiting the Price campaign as a case study in how Soros-cash massively influences targeted DA races.

An Unlikely Candidate

Price is an interesting character. Endorsed by radical Communist Party activist Angela Davis, and left-wing actor Danny Glover, who has repeatedly defended dictators like Nicholas Maduro and Hugo Chavez, Price is not the sort of person one would expect to be interested in work as a prosecutor. In fact, as a career civil rights and defense attorney with no prior experience in prosecution, Price was an unlikely and unexpected candidate for DA from the very beginning.

In April 2018, Price even told the Mercury News that she “never wanted to be a prosecutor” and wasn’t interested in running. The very next month, though, Price’s campaign was in full swing. What changed?

Coincidentally, Soros’s California Justice and Public Safety PAC made its first expenditures on behalf of Price in May 2018. Surely, Soros’s sudden cash infusion was unrelated to Price’s equally sudden change of heart?

It wouldn’t be the first time that the promise of funding from Soros’s “safety and justice” PACs apparently coaxed reluctant candidates into running.

In Oregon, for example, Max Wall, a failed DA candidate, met with Soros PAC consigliere Whitney Tymas shortly before declaring his candidacy—though he insisted to reporters that he had decided to run before the meeting. Wall also reportedly told his friends he was “waiting to hear from the ‘money people’” before kicking his campaign into full gear. His campaign ultimately benefitted from large sums of money Soros’s PAC. CRC later exposed that the money from Soros’s PAC in Oregon was not from Soros, but was secretly funneled to the PAC by Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Second Time’s a Charm?

Unlike 2018, when Price was only just defeated, Price will not be facing an incumbent candidate this time around. The spot is up for the taking, and Price seems to stand a good chance of winning. If she does, Price would likely bring with her the same dangerous “reforms” endorsed by Soros-funded DAs.

According to the Bay Area chapter of the left-wing Sunrise Movement Price has told BLM protestors, “We have to defund police, defund prosecutors, and divest from prisons.” She has also promised to “stop charging and/or incarcerating youths under the age of 18 as adults” and  to create a “conviction integrity unit” that would use some of the DA’s limited resources to examining and overturning its own prior convictions. In other places where these same policies have been tried, the results have been disastrous.

Past Performance

Just hours away in Los Angeles, for example, DA George Gascon, whose campaign was also funded by Soros, made an identical promise to never prosecute juveniles as adults. This “reform” recently led to a 26-year-old transgender woman convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl in a women’s restroom being sentenced to two years in a juvenile detention facility. Gascon’s office reportedly refused to prosecute the offender as an adult because the offender was two weeks from turning 18 at the time of the assault.

Across the country in Philadelphia, DA Larry Krasner, whose campaign was heavily funded by Soros, has created a “conviction integrity unit” like the one Price has promised. Under Krasner’s watch Philadelphia has become one of the most dangerous cities in the nation, closer to a third-world country than a former metropolis, while his convictions integrity unit has overturned a whopping 21 convictions. This sounds good, but critics like William McSwain, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, have alleged that many of these acquittals were achieved by throwing out incriminating evidence without cause, and that Krasner is motivated by a “hatred for law enforcement” rather than a desire to exonerate the truly innocent.

When Will the Experiments End?

In his book, The Man Behind the Curtain, Matt Palumbo recalls a harrowing quote from Soros himself that bodes ill for the future of America’s urban centers.

Speaking on the Polish people and the fallout of the “shock therapy” economic reforms Soros himself had helped to create in 1990s Poland, Soros acknowledged that the reforms would be “very tough on the population, but people were willing to take a lot of pain in order to see real change.” How Soros divined the will of the entirety of Poland remains a mystery, but apparently, he is performing the same mind-reading act today.

The reality today, as it was in Poland, is that Soros does not and cannot understand what ordinary people want or need. Instead, he justifies using entire cities as pawns in his utopian “open society” experiments by crowning himself the people’s benevolent protector.