Stealing the Law – USA Gov Policy

A disturbing agenda can be discerned in this month’s Texas primary results for district attorneys.

Jolie McCullough, writing in The Texas Tribune reported that “Six of 12 sitting Texas district attorneys who faced 2018 primary challengers lost their races. Whether that’s normal turnover or part of a larger focus on criminal justice reform, several experts say it’s no longer safe to be an incumbent prosecutor.”

Those who lost tended to be more conservative. McCoullagh notes: “Most notably, liberal billionaire George Soros has set his sights on transforming the American criminal justice system one local prosecutor at a time. His money largely funds candidates running on reformist issues.”

Political action committees (pacs) funded by Soros spent millions in what normally would be considered lackluster district attorney races. A Soros pac gave almost $1 million to an obscure DA primary candidate, the leftist Joe Gonzalez. As a result, he defeated his opponent, Nico LaHood, by almost 20%, who, McCoullogh notes, “was targeted because of his outspoken Christian faith and opposition to illegal immigration. Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, both Republicans, also criticized Soros’ involvement in the race last week…’ He’s trying to change the fabric of this country,’ LaHood said. “If there’s a DA that does not have the agenda that he does, then he wants to get them out.’”

The election results of 2010–2016 were devastating to the Progressive Left. Eventually, The White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, most Governorships, and most state legislatures were won by Republicans. Left wing activists have decided to do an end-run around that by using state attorneys general, local district attorneys, and the highly partisan Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to

It is a plastic tube, which fits around the cialis de prescription penile region. A blend of these herbs cialis generic 10mg is processed in the brain. On inspection of the results, comparing the 2 groups: One group with a high sat-fat / high cholesterol diet and The other group with a low sat-fat and low cholesterol diet reduced the risk of buy cialis line heart disease. The FDA approved this drug after analyzing its clinical efficacy and safety. generic cheap cialis http://www.learningworksca.org/about/sponsors/ As the New York Analysis of Policy and Government has previously noted, the concept of elected and appointed officials exercising their office with complete impartiality is a basic tenet of fair government. While the absolute perfection of this ideal is rarely achieved, the past eight years have seen an unprecedented abandonment of the goal. Agencies such as the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service were extensively misused by the Obama Administration for partisan purposes. With the regime change following the 2016 elections, the center of gravity for using public office to benefit party or ideological interests shifted to some state attorneys general and district attorney races.

Martin Morse Wooster, writing for the Capital Research Center notes that “Aiming to reshape society, state attorneys general wield ever-expanding powers over private corporations, foundations and nonprofits. Their activities–too often motivated by ideology and politics–frequently undermine the very institutions they are supposed to protect.”

Alan Greenblatt writing in Governing magazine reports that “’Democratic attorneys general are going to be very active, suing a number of regulatory agencies,’ says Paul Nolette, a political scientist at Marquette University. ‘They will be prepared to use a kitchen sink strategy against everything coming out of the EPA…’ The number of Democratic attorneys general has ticked down with recent Republican successes at the state level. But there are still 21 of them — more than the number of Democratic governors or legislatures…And it isn’t really the number of Democratic AGs that matters. A single activist attorney general such as Eric Schneiderman of New York or Xavier Becerra of California can command a small army of lawyers.…But with prominent Democratic AGs threatening to challenge Trump … it’s clear that legal briefs will be among the most powerful weapons progressives will be able to deploy against him.”

As was the case in Texas’ Gonzalez race, the issue that has gathered the most headlines in the battle between partisan attorneys generals and candidates for local district attorneys and their opponents is immigration. California’s Xavier Becerra plays a significant role in California’s attempt to ignore federal law regarding illegal aliens.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.