Because Soros gave money $1 million to a PAC that said it would contribute to Bragg’s campaign (the precise amount of money the PAC said it would contribute) and because nearly half a million dollars of his money went to Bragg’s campaign as Soros would have been expected, Soros funded Bragg’s campaign. His funds provided a big part of Bragg’s primary war chest and were always very likely to.

If Kessler, relying on the fact that the money to Bragg flowed through a PAC and the fact that Bragg received lots of other money, had awarded one Pinocchio, that still would have been one too many. But at least he would have a case. To award three Pinocchios, which Kessler does even to the assertion that Soros “backed” Bragg, is outrageous.

But that isn’t the worst part of Kessler’s article. He went say that those who point to the Soros-Bragg connection are being “incendiary” because Soros happens to be Jewish …

Kessler sniffs that “the incendiary focus on Soros. . .is a dangerous game that plays into stereotypes of rich Jewish financiers secretly controlling events.” It isn’t, though, unless those who focus on Soros also focus on his religion or imply dual loyalties — the way some on the left used to do in Sheldon Adelson’s case, without a peep of protest from the mainstream media.

[Kessler’s argument amounts to sophistry, a way to dodge the obvious. George Soros has been an explicit advocate and donor for progressive DA candidates in order to revamp the politics of prosecution. As Paul writes, that’s certainly Soros’ prerogative, and at least *he’s* been honest about it. The sudden media consensus to equate criticism of Soros’ political agenda to anti-Semitism is much, much less honest. It amounts to an attempt to shame critics of those policies into silence. — Ed]