Now that Chesa Boudin is out on his ear as district attorney for San Francisco, not surviving his June 7 recall, it looks like the Soros crew is anxious to say they never knew him.

Sure, defeat is an orphan and victory has a thousand fathers.

But Chesa is little different from all the other district attorneys that the Soros-funded organizations have sought to embed in power. They all create the same telltale chaos and out-of-control crime in the solid-blue cities foolish enough to elect them, based on their criminal justice "reform" agendas, which is shorthand for 'let 'em all out.'.

But the Washington Free Beacon did notice something weird anyway in the wake of San Franciscans' decision to throw Chesa out:

Representatives for George Soros no longer want to be associated with disgraced prosecutor Chesa Boudin now that he's been rebuked by the liberal voters of San Francisco, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Hours after Boudin was recalled by double-digits on Tuesday, representatives for the liberal billionaire contacted the Free Beacon to reject its characterization of Boudin as a "George Soros darling." The Soros representatives from public relations firm BerlinRosen say he never contributed to Boudin, and that it is wrong to label Boudin a "Soros prosecutor."

"We disagree with any analysis that labels any prosecutor as a ‘Soros prosecutor'—each candidate stands on their own," said the BerlinRosen representative. "Justice & Public Safety PAC, the political action committee through which Mr. Soros supports prosecutor candidates, has not supported—in the past or in the present, directly or indirectly—Boudin."

The Soros-paid public relations operative, Alex Navarro-McKay, contended to the Beacon that despite the long list of circumstantial and indirect associations cited by the Beacon here, as well as Chesa being featured at numerous Soros events, the connection was too distant to be considered credible, calling it a "ridiculous contortion."

The Beacon believed that the timing of the note from Navarro-McKay was significant, coming on the heels of Chesa's booting, but actually, it isn't. Navarro-McKay seems to have the unlucky job of having to comb through the media every day and look for references to Boudin as a Soros district attorney.

We've certainly heard from him -- last December -- when he wrote:

Re: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/12/chesa_boudin_faces_recall.html

 

This article states: 

"SF’s political culture and a bundle of George Soros’ money played a major part in setting this all up."

"Of course, Boudin is not alone.  He’s just one of several George Soros plants in our dystopic urban cores." 

 

I am a representative of Justice & Public Safety PAC, the political action committee primarily funded by George Soros.  Mr. Soros has not -- directly or indirectly -- backed or supported or contributed to Mr. Boudin.

 

For reference, please see this list -- published by a conservative research organization -- of prosecutors and district attorneys that Mr. Soros has directly or indirectly supported. 

https://www.influencewatch.org/app/uploads/2021/04/Soros-Attorney-Funding.pdf

 

Mr Boudin is not on that list: 

 

Please revise the article to remove the references to Mr. Soros.

Well, that is one argument. The Beacon shows that the connections are there, despite Navarro-McKay's denials. Whatevs.

The question is: Why would Soros pay good money for someone to go through the press and demand corrections on every single reference to Chesa as a Soros D.A.? That's weird stuff.

It can't be because Chesa was such a failure as a D.A. or that he was thrown out by voters-- all of the Soros D.A.s are comparable failures same as Chesa was.

Every place a Soros D.A. darkens a city door, the city becomes a socialist hellhole and a pit of crime and disorder. Why would there be an exception for association with Soros, given that Soros is associated with other human disasters such as Kim Foxx, George Gascon and Larry Krasner. Was Chesa really different? He was a bird of a feather.

It sounds like there was a rift between the Soros groups, and the Chesa/Bill Ayers political machinery that must have gone back far earlier. It wasn't just Chesa's defeat that triggered this crusade to distance Soros from Chesa. Was it Chesa's nakedly communist and terrorist background? Hard to say, Soros claims he isn't a communist, but on the other hand, look at who he supports. Could it have been something negative in Chesa's background dating back to his Hugo Chavez's translator days in Caracas, such as the claims by Venezuelan exiles that he has been seen with politically connected Chavista gangs and guns in the filthy slums of Caracas? Maybe, but it seems the issue would need to be bigger. Did Chesa, who won a Rhodes scholarship, take it away from a Soros favorite and the grudge has remained ever since? Was there some sort of political calculus that Chesa couldn't cut it in the grand Soros vision for chaos in America's cities? Again, hard to say. Just spitballin' here, none of this is anything but speculation, but it seems weird, very weird, that Soros would want to distance himself from Chesa, and that this distancing effort has gone back much further than the election, and it involves actual money spent on public relations professionals.

The only thing interesting here is that maybe it's a rift that conservatives can dig further on -- lookin' at you, James O'Keefe. What is this rift and how can be used to break up the monolithic lefitst death grip on the U.S.? Whatever the reason may be, it's got to be something big. What could that big reason be?

Image credit: World Economic Forum. swiss-image.ch/Photo by Sebastian Derungs (cropped) // CC BY-SA 2.0. Image filtered with Graphite by BeCasso