Come to an elected official and offer his office $625,000 to change a policy and that’s bribery.
This from frontpagemag.com.
Something interesting is going on in San Francisco where DA Brooke Jenkins—a black woman who ousted the former pro-crime Chesa Boudin and promised to actually enforce the law—is taking on the MacArthur Foundation.
While we often call pro-crime DAs “Soros DAs” and indeed the Nazi collaborating radical billionaire did indeed play a major role in building a pro-crime network of DAs who ignore the law…
…there are a variety of major foundations
who destroyed public safety in America.
The MacArthur Foundation is one of them.
Under DA Chesa Boudin’s reign of terror, the MacArthur Foundation had been providing sizable amounts of money to the SF DA’s office to keep criminals on the loose.
Now the MacArthur Foundation warned that it wouldn’t provide $625,000 to the DA’s office until it shows it is ‘fully committed to the goals and strategies’ of the foundation.
The Foundation complains that there are too many criminals in jail instead of on the streets:
CCSF’s jail population has experienced significant increases and is now above the baseline ADP of 1,200.
DA Jenkins and Monifa Willis, her chief of staff, shot back by making it clear what was at stake here:
On multiple occasions you have sat in meetings with two black women, lecturing to us about your concern for jail population increases, the injustices of the criminal justice system and populations that need serving.
Further, the letter sarcastically noted:
The ideological goal of reducing the jail population at all costs has conflicted with our emphasis on doing so responsibly and safely, which I am sure is a new boundary in a post-Chesa Boudin era.
And continued:
The Foundation has continued to indirectly emphasize that success is solely being measured by how rapidly we release people from custody regardless of their risk to the public or the lack of infrastructure in place to assist them in avoiding future criminal conduct as evident by your continued reference to jail population census when appraising our grant efforts.
Our office has a mission to protect the safety of all those who live, work, and visit San Francisco, and while we believe in the mission of identifying alternatives to incarceration, we must achieve it in a manner that does not come at the expense of the safety of our city.
In the first place, what is deeply troubling about this exchange:
[A]n organization was able
to bribe a DA’s office to free criminals.
This practice, which began under former SF pro-crime DA George Gascon (currently an LA pro-crime DA facing a likely election defeat) is deeply disturbing and undemocratic.
Come to an elected official and offer his office
$625,000 to change a policy and that’s bribery.
———————————
But describe it as a “grant” to their office and route it through a nonprofit and it’s somehow not only legal, but praiseworthy.
———————————
This is a deeply corrupt practice that sidelines
voters and resembles that of a banana republic.
In a clean political system, voters make policy.
It’s only in a deeply dirty one that a wealthy group can come in and pay elected officials to sell out their voters.
God speed to the return of Conservatism.
