Spread the love

by Joseph DeMaio, ©2022

What part does this man play in U.S. and world economics? Is he controlling one or both?

(Oct. 14, 2022) — The kerfuffle that originated between Arizona gubernatorial candidates Kari Lake (GOP) and Katie Hobbs (Democrat) continues to grow and has now become a four-entity rugby scrum.  Your humble servant has noted the competition between Lake and Hobbs before at The P&E here and here, as has Project Veritas here.

Additional details can be found here, but the short version is that because Hobbs refused to debate Lake under the long-standing protocols of the independent “Arizona Clean Elections Commission,” Lake would appear alone for a separate interview.  Because Hobbs had refused to participate, she forfeited the opportunity to “speak to the people” at the forum provided by the commission.

Under an agreement between the commission and PBS, the interview was to have been broadcast on the local PBS station, which is operated by the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communications at Arizona State University in Phoenix. 

But on the morning of the day when the interview was to have been aired – and without prior notice to either Lake or the commission – Hobbs announced on MSNBC that PBS Channel 8 in Phoenix had offered her equal time after Lake’s interview, despite her refusal to accept the commission’s debate invitation.  As Cronkite would have said: “And that’s the way it is.

It remains unclear whether Channel 8 approached Hobbs first, or whether Hobbs begged the station to help a wombat in distress.  Given the bias of PBS, faithful P&E readers are invited to draw their own conclusion.

The commission cancelled and postponed the Lake interview, deeming the PBS action to be a breach of their agreement, and postponing rescheduling to a later date with a new venue…, and new broadcasting partner.  When former Obama advisor David Axelrod chimes in that it is a “mistake” (duh…) for Hobbs to refuse to debate Lake, since it telegraphs to the voters a concession by Hobbs that Lake is a “formidable media personality,” you know – unless you’re in deep denial – that you’re in trouble.  In political campaigning, where perception becomes reality, Lake appears resolute and robust while Hobbs looks like a panicked wombat scampering away to her burrow.  Watch the Project Veritas video again.

However, while that battle continues to unfold, there is another issue lurking in the weeds…, one that your humble servant finds interesting…, and perhaps of interest to others.  That issue involves some of the sources of Katie Hobbs’s campaign contributions.  Here is a hint: does anyone recognize the surname “Soros?”

While Hobbs has received a bunch of donations from many organizations, PAC’s and individuals, two names stand out: Jonathan Soros and Jennifer Soros.  From all appearances – and of course, appearances can be misleading or wrong and there may be others with the same surname – Jonathan Soros is the son of George Soros, noted billionaire globalist and benefactor of “soft-on-crime” and “reform” prosecutors.  The “nation erosion” talents of George Soros are well known, as discussed here.  In addition, the wife of Jonathan Soros is one Jennifer Soros, both of whom live in New York City…, where also lives (from time to time) George Soros.

A quick dive into the not particularly user-friendly campaign finance and candidate contribution website records in Arizona found here reveals that both Jonathan and Jennifer Soros “maxxed-out” their individual contributions to the “Elect Katie Hobbs” campaign committee.  Arizona law limits individual campaign contributions to a candidate per election cycle to $5,300.  Together, they contributed $10,600 to a candidate who won’t debate her opposition and sprints away from investigative reporters, spilling food and drink along the way.

Indeed, Jennifer Soros (or one of her “people”) was apparently so enthralled with Hobbs’s candidacy – or oblivious to Arizona campaign contribution limit law – that five days after making the maximum lawful $5,300 contribution, another $5,300 payment was made.  Correctly, the Hobbs campaign caught the error and three days later, refunded the excess (ahem, illegal and prohibited…) contribution.

Katie Hobbs is currently serving as Arizona Secretary of State

The point, however, is this: Mr. and Mrs. Soros, both living in New York City along with globalist George Soros, it is a fair bet that no Soros money will have ended up in the Lake campaign coffers.  Whether their political views align with those of George Soros is a bit murky.  On the other hand, it is less than a giant leap to conclude that they don’t support Lake.

One wonders: with no debates or forums scheduled where Lake and Hobbs will either appear together or sequentially, will anyone know of the Soros contributions?  Will a forum moderator even ask Hobbs the question?  Better yet, will Kari Lake ask the question? Inquiring minds want to know.

Stay tuned … this could get interesting.

2 Comments
Newest
Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sunday, October 16, 2022 12:11 AM

Good article, Mr DeMaio! I have only one or two short but not-so sweet comments. George Soros, YOU ARE A SCUMBAG AND A HUGE DETRIMENT TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. If it were possible to deport you (let’s say for anti-American traitorous activities), then I would say PLEASE DO IT NOW! For your information, my speech is protected by the 1st Amendment. BUT, THERE IS NO PATRIOTISM, UNSELFISHNESS, OR HUMANITY IN YOUR WANNA-BE COMMUNIST WORDS OR DEEDS. I guess you are protected, too, unless what you’ve been doing qualifies as the proverbial HOLLERING OUT “FIRE” IN A CROWDED THEATER! In your case, Komrade Soros, I prefer to say that the “theater” is America itself and that you have been falsely proselytizing and trying to “transform” our country (like Barack Obama) WAY TOO LONG! Is that really lawful and acceptable behavior according to our standards of decency? Can’t you find something better to do with your wealth?

Marie Reuter
Saturday, October 15, 2022 11:40 AM

There should be a law that only residents of a state can make campaign donations to a candidate. Why should people from New York be able to influence our elections?