On Thursday the CityWatch publication ran a story entitled, “Why We Should All be Concerned about the Attempt to Buy the District Attorney’s Office.” The author was Michele Hanisee, an LA County Deputy District Attorney who happens to be the President of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, the collective bargaining agent that represents more than 1000 Deputy DAs who work in LA County.
She argues that there has been an “attempt to bypass the legislative and initiative process through the installation of elected Deputy District Attorneys who promise to ignore criminal statutes with which they disagree.”
She writes, “This effort has been financed in large part by out of state billionaire George Soros, who solely funds the (misnamed) California Justice and Public Safety PAC.”
The article highlights the races in Sacramento County, San Diego County, Alameda County and, of course, Yolo County.
She writes of Yolo County: “Yolo District Attorney, Jeff Reisig, is an experienced, respected, thoughtful and innovative District Attorney which earned him the endorsement of the Sacramento Bee.”
During his term, she says he has:
- Implemented a multi-cultural community council.
- Started the state’s second neighborhood court program.
- Helped create Yolo’s first Mental Health Court.
- Helped create a Homeless Neighborhood Court.
- Was the first DA in the state to provide implicit bias training.
She then writes: “His Soros-backed opponent, Dean Johansson, has been accused of domestic violence, as revealed by police reports obtained by Crime Victims United, stemming from a 2007 incident in which he allegedly kicked his minor son in the chest and pulled his daughter out of the house by her hair. He has pledged on his website to stop seeking the death penalty.”
Aside from repeating the largely discredited police account from 2007, there is another big problem: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT MR. JOHANSSON IS BACKED BY SOROS.
I was immediately skeptical so I went to the Campaign Disclosure Statement that was filed on Thursday. It shows that Dean Johansson has raised a whopping $60,000 (just under) for the entire campaign as of May 19. None of that money appears to be coming from Soros.
Some money has come in, in the last week, as they try to get enough money for a mailer and some campaign ads. But a lot of that came from Dean Johansson himself.
His opponent, on the other hand, has raised over $100,000 this year and he began with $72,000 in the bank (more than Mr. Johansson has raised in total).
The spending tells the tale. Dean Johansson has been outspent nearly 3 to 1. Mr. Johansson has spent $52,000 compared to $140,000 by Jeff Reisig.
Just to be sure, we asked Dean Johansson if his campaign was receiving Soros money. He practically fell out of his chair.
“I would not have this Visa bill if I did,” he said. “See our disclosure and see where I’ve been paying non-refundable money of my own. Not a single person (campaign staff) is paid.
“Where is that Soros money?” he asked. “We might be up to $60K and that is already spent. Everything has been volunteer except for some of the money for a camera person which is minimal. All the media and everything else is volunteer.”
That is the part that the Deputy DA Association is missing – whatever she thinks of the campaign, it is the very definition of grassroots. According to the campaign they have had more than 500 volunteers. They have had more than 50 people walking precincts.
They are sending out handwritten postcards to voters rather than slickly produced brochures. If they win – still probably considered a longshot – it will not be because of outside money, it will be because the message of the campaign, changing the criminal justice system, resonated with the voters.
The Vanguard emailed Michele Hanisee late on Friday afternoon to ask her to substantiate the claim that the Johansson campaign was Soros-backed. At the time of publication, the Vanguard has received no response.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
If I had just joined the Johansson campaign, I could understand not yet having received my check from George Soros. However, I have been part of this campaign since the first major campaign meeting. Still no check. Just like no check for my participation in the Women’s March. 🙁
So Dean must be hiding the money somewhere. Have you tossed his house?
What money? He has none.
Jim
Your comment has exactly the same degree of credibility as does that of Michelle Hanisee. I just wish her’s were also tongue in cheek.
Is Larry’s canine ambassador going to the market today?
Jim
I don’t think she has made up her mind yet. But I did hear her grumbling about not having received her check from Soros yet.
Is Larry taking money from Soros too?
Soros money is so widely distributed into thousands of organizations supporting his great socialist society pursuit that it would be difficult to impossible to verify a connection to the Johansson campaign.
However, clearly Soros would support Johansson’s anti-law enforcement / pro-criminal activism. That is the general strategy of Soros and his bots… to inject extremist activists into political positions where they can ignore the laws they don’t like and make new laws that help advance the “cause”.
If you look at the filing – it’s very clear the money is almost all local. Soros is putting huge amounts in elsewhere- nothing here.
There is no doubt that Soros would support him, the point is that Soros isn’t buying the race, because the org hasn’t contributed any money.
“to inject extremist activists into political positions where they can ignore the laws they don’t like and make new laws that help advance the “cause”.”
Fake news.
Should scare the crap out of people have dishonest police and DA groups have been in this election cycle.
It should scare the crap out of people noting the dishonest anti-police and pro-criminal activism at work in this election cycle.
The DA over-charging claim is just like the toxic air pollution claim of Nishi. Disingenuous twaddle to gin up unfounded fear and outrage to advance a selfish agenda of activism.
The over-charging claim has data to back it up. You’ve never addressed that data.
It is the “over” part has no basis in fact/data. It is completely subjective.
Every opinion is inherently subjective. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t objective data to back it up.
Let’s look at the basic fact of “over-charging”… existed long before Reisig (and I’ll not be voting for him… but am talking about “over-charging”)…
Someone comes from an area where there are bars… 2 AM… driving erratically… when pulled over they say they have had a drink… fail sobriety tests… breathalizer is a “tweener”, and the equipment hasn’t been calibrated for over a year… automatically charged with 1) driving with a BAC over 0.08, and, 2) driving under the influence… standard.
Someone is picked up in a “screen” stop… no erratic driving, but an officer decides to do the breath thing, blows a 0.08… (passes the field sobriety)… automatically charged with 1) driving with a BAC of over 0.08, and, 2) driving under the influence… standard.
Overcharging?
Not sure that’s where I would go.
Here are some examples:
1. Two guys steal a $200 piece of equipment from the back of a truck, that’s misdemeanor. But they are charged with a felony conspiracy charge on top of that.
2. A guy bounces two checks, the DA charges him with burglary
3. A man shoplifts chinese food, he is charged with burglary
4. A man had .05 grams of meth, he was charged not only with possession, but transportation, so he ended up with four years in prison. Obviously prior to Prop 47
5. Post-prop 47, we have covered a number of borderline possession cases where they have charged with intent to sell to get it to a felony charge
6. Man was arrested for camping in davis around the train tracks. Did not have any drugs or stolen property on him. Charges were dismissed after the PD filed 8th Amendment motion. This one just happened last week, btw.
Good. It is simple… if you don’t want to get charged, then don’t steal. You seem to embrace thieves as victim class. It is not “over-charging” for those of us getting ripped off constantly by so many immoral law-breaking punks.
We can agree with the meth charge issue as it is a victimless crime. Unless there was some history with this person selling.
Basically you are justifying just about any punishment for any crime.
Jeff’s defense for overcharging is that there is no such thing as over-charging. You do the crime, you do the time, even if it’s much longer than one would normally expect.
If the law supports the charge, then that is the law. Stealing is not “a mistake” it is a crime. $200 in tools stolen harms the victim. His insurance would not cover the deductible. Depending on the timing of the stealing it could result in lost wages for the tool owner. It could make the month difficult for the family having to come up with the money to replace the tools. I have absolutely no sympathy for the thief and 100% sympathy for the true victim. I support our DA charging at the top of what the law supports to make it clear that a life of thievery in Yolo County is going to risk significant punishment.
The clear solution to your concern about over-charging is to have a community without thieves.
A friend of mine owns a landscape maintenance business and has had his shop broken into several times and his equipment stolen. His insurance premiums have skyrocketed. He has had significant financial damage done to his family by these thieves. The last time they used a portable grinder to saw through the hardened steel locks and hinges. Put Johansson in the DA seat and we can expect an increase in this community harm. Like the thieves, that might please you for some reason that I can only guess, but not me.
Jeff
“It is the “over” part has no basis in fact/data. It is completely subjective.”
And yet you previously claimed that the DA had to “follow the law”. Now in your words overcharging is “completely subjective”. Either the law prescribes precise charges, or it does not. The judge in the candy bar case certainly felt there was “overcharging”. Same with the attempted 3 strikes cheese case. I believe we agree that the judges opinions carry more weight than either yours or mine.
“This effort has been financed in large part by out of state billionaire George Soros,”
“Soros money is so widely distributed into thousands of organizations supporting his great socialist society pursuit that it would be difficult to impossible to verify a connection to the Johansson campaign.”
I agree with Jeff’s statement. Then perhaps it would be better not to include Soros money as part of a smear campaign against Dean Johansson since it cannot be verified. This would be no different than me asserting that the Kochs were funding Reisig’s campaign.
Can we really not stick with the evidence and policy differences of the two candidates?
What about the candidate taking money from Koch affiliates? You seem to be curiously interested in that.
Jim
I have zero interest in either. That post was intended only to point out the ridiculousness of this line of attack.
Jeff
“Good. It is simple… if you don’t want to get charged, then don’t steal.”
This is absurd. If I splash a pundit I do not like with water, should I be charged with attempted murder by drowning?
How about if I strike a politician in the face with a pie? Should the charge be attempted murder by suffocation?
No one is claiming that there should be no charges. Just that the charges should be commensurate with the actual crime. Thus, no felony for a candy bar theft. How is anyone served by taxpayer payed for imprisonment for the theft of a candy bar?
Your comparisons are absurd. Someone that steals a candy bar is a thief and demonstrating their moral principles that would mean they would likely steal again and again and again. And if they were charged with a felony it would be because they have a history of stealing again and again and again. It wasn’t that last crime that got them a felony. I think you know that, but conveniently fail to admit it.
“How about if I strike a politician in the face with a pie? Should the charge be attempted murder by suffocation?”
No, neither should you be beatified.
“Thus, no felony for a candy bar theft.”
Really? What if it is taken by force or threat of force?
The worst part of three strikes is that it reduces our options in those cases where the charging is used as punishment for inconveniencing the system. Once upon a time in America, we trusted judges to use their best judgement when it came to sentencing, now legislators have given themselves the legal authority to impose “mandatory” sentences. DAs can’t resist this chance to act tough on crime.
I have been on the lethal end of a gun, pointed at me to induce the gift of a 29¢ cheeseburger. While I am sympathetic to the plight of the hungry, I do think such a crime rises to the level of a felony.
The “Soros’ Money” claim is a familiar tactic in elections and at the monkey island in the zoo. Wear goggles and a plastic poncho.
‘Amen’, to all…
[assuming you meant a disposable plastic poncho…]
“If I splash a pundit I do not like with water” How much water?
Your reasoning is absurd. If they’re guilty of misdemeanor theft, they should be charged with misdemeanor theft. Again and again and again.
I agree… but I’d add a nuance… after first time, they are financially liable (even it means liens on assets, future income) for all costs related to arrest, judicial proceedings, etc. Not just the nominal fine…
Freedom isn’t free after you’ve committed a crime… multiple times…