Following his financial intervention in high-profile Northern Virginia Commonwealth’s Attorney races, Leftist billionaire, George Soros, has entered the fray in Albemarle County.

The Soros-funded Justice and Public Safety PAC, dropped $5,000 into the already flush coffers of Democrat, Jim Hingeley, in an attempt to upend incumbent Commonwealth’s Attorney Robert Tracci’s re-election bid.

Tracci, who operates under the mantra of “Equal Justice Under Law,” stands in stark contrast to Hingeley, who has vowed to exercise virtually unlimited “prosecutorial discretion” in order to reshape the administration of “justice” in Albemarle County.

Jim Hingeley, a resident of Charlottesville City, also was the beneficiary of $64,000 in donations from local Democrat kingmaker —and Soros political varletSonjia Smith.


  1. Reshaping the administration of justice in Albemarle County by showing a little mercy to the mentally ill – the local Christian Right, which has never needed mercy and therefore doesn’t need or worship the Father of Mercies, Jesus Christ (1Cor 2:3) shudders.

  2. “I will increase the use of diversion programs like the therapeutic docket for people with serious mental illness and the drug court. Treating the root cause of certain crimes is my priority rather than punishing the symptoms. Programs that divert people from jail or prison – or from the justice system entirely – can save the taxpayers money, reduce reoffending, and diminish the collateral harms of criminal prosecution. These programs keep people in the community instead of locked up in enormously expensive jails and prisons. Participants in such programs are intensively supervised to reduce the risk of harm to the community while they are receiving treatment, and participants are required to work, attend school, or perform community service and to support their families and pay taxes. Diversion is especially appropriate for people suffering from drug addiction or mental illness.”
    –This is the only place in Jim’s “priorities” page where he even mentions “mental health,” and here he gives scant mention. Why would one cite the mentally ill–and the Bible– in the context of Hingeley when virtually none of his lists of priorities if elected deals with mental illness? I think you’d have been more accurate if you had said “reshaping the admin…by showing a little mercy to drug offenders,” since that is really where Jim’s platform is headed.

  3. He mentions mental illness twice in that statement, including in the very first sentence you quote. He goes on to talk about “treating the root cause of certain crimes.” Isn’t that the most effective, and in this case the most humane, way of dealing with any problem? Unless of course you just want to lock every criminal up for life, or at least lock them up repeatedly which is a waste of money, which I thought you guys were against.

    “Use every man after his desert, and who shall ‘scape whipping?” as Hamlet said. Shakespeare wasn’t a Christian, but the Bible says the same thing with other words. One reason to show mercy is that every single one of us needs it.

  4. Ken, please enlighten me to how a commonwealth attorney can treat the root cause of the problem? When someone is alleged to have committed a crime, isn’t his job to charge and prosecute? Please help me understand.

  5. Good questions. First of all, if a Commonwealth’s Attorney wants to treat mental illness, he or she turns to mental health professionals, not prison guards.

    Secondly, the job of the Commonwealth’s Attorney is determined by the people of the commonwealth. The people can, if they want, just direct the CA to prosecute every accused person to the fullest extent of the law. But a just commonwealth wants justice for all of its citizens. Justice is just treatment. Is it just to give a mentally ill person, whose mental illness is judged by health professionals to have been a factor in the committal of the crime, the same sentence as a mentally healthy person?

    Take veterans. More than half of the veterans in the criminal justice system have either mental health problems or substance-abuse disorders like drug addiction, a problem we know often leads to crime. If a veteran suffering because of service to his or her country commits a crime, shouldn’t we take their mental health into consideration when deciding their sentence? Doesn’t it dishonor their service not to do so? Do we really want to be a society that just says, “Tough; you did it, you pay for it”?

    If we recognize that wise parents, business and community leaders, etc. use discretion in their decision-making rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, why should we deny it to prosecutors? There is no justice, or effective treatment, without good judgment.

  6. […] Prosecutors claim they’ll retry the case, and they might actually go through with it, but their chances of winning are likely slim to none. Why, you might ask, if these charges are so flimsy, do the prosecutors claim (at least for now) that they’re going to eagerly retry the case? Well, the Commonwealth’s Attorney is a highly ideologically charged, Soros-funded libtard. […]

Leave a Reply