What the fuck is wrong with you, Austin?

[SquishMitten 10451]

On 3/5/2024 at 3:23 PM, High Plains Drifter said:

 

so they do their own road maintenance, fire dept, police dept? Seems like at a smaller scale, those things would be more expensive. What am I missing?

No taxes for the city or Austin CC. They already have their own utility district, and I think they'd pick up an emergency service district tax. So, a million dollar house would have paid ~$4k less in taxes last year.

[SquishMitten 10451]

On 3/6/2024 at 8:36 AM, YGIFS said:

Sometimes I think like a criminal.  I get the mini-train had inherent value.  I appreciate the planning and pulling off of the heist.  But when you're taking a dump after lunch today, let your imagination wander...who the fuck was the Fence in this scheme?  How do you convince some criminal masterminds that can you discretely sell a miniature train, take your cut, and make them well in the meantime?  I mean, I know some pretty sophisticated, but very shady people, but how do you perform a confidence racket on some guys to grab a mini-train and then move the product?  There's con-men and there mini con-men.  

They didn't steal the train. They robbed the passengers.

[MAUFRAIS 6669]

So you’re telling me pumpkin and honey bunny weren’t planning on taking that whole diner with them?

[PvilleStang 2923]

11 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

KXAN interviewed the Sylestine the other night on his block walk who stated that 40% of Garza’s funding came from out of state. The ONLY reason I heard that is because it came directly out of the candidates mouth. You’d think someone would have fact checked that statement and made a bigger deal out of it one way or another. Since it didn’t get coverage I’m going to think it’s likely true and it was not covered intentionally.

From what I understand, a bulk of his coffers rolled from his last go-round, so it's hard to get a definitive number from out of state donors.  You could technically say that all the money rolled was from out of state contributions.  I also think the ActBlue PAC coffers make it much harder to track the source of some of those generic donations.

[PvilleStang 2923]

So, I did see there was a contribution made to the Jose Garza campaign on January 17th ($37,200.00), from Texas Justice and Public Safety PAC (https://www.transparencyusa.org/tx/contributor/jose-garza-campaign/contributions). 

 

Anyone want to guess who funds that PAC?

Spoiler

 

source: https://www.transparencyusa.org/tx/committee/texas-justice-and-public-safety-pac-82400-gpac/contributions

 

[chainsaw 9891]

37k seems like not very much money.

[royiv 9403]

16 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

So, I did see there was a contribution made to the Jose Garza campaign on January 17th ($37,200.00), from Texas Justice and Public Safety PAC (https://www.transparencyusa.org/tx/contributor/jose-garza-campaign/contributions). 

 

Anyone want to guess who funds that PAC?

  Hide contents

 

source: https://www.transparencyusa.org/tx/committee/texas-justice-and-public-safety-pac-82400-gpac/contributions

 

 

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

37k seems like not very much money.

Approximately 0.62% of the amount that Abbott accepted from Jeff Yass and 1.2% of the amount accepted by Dan Patrick from Defend Texas Liberty PAC whose main supporter is Tim Dunn. 
 

BUT SOROS!!!!

[ABSR 5327]

7 minutes ago, royiv said:

 

Approximately 0.62% of the amount that Abbott accepted from Jeff Yass and 1.2% of the amount accepted by Dan Patrick from Defend Texas Liberty PAC whose main supporter is Tim Dunn. 
 

BUT SOROS!!!!

What percent is it to the total that Biden has collected or Trump?  Because comparing local DA contribution amounts to other larger elections is super helpful and insightful. 

You may or may not have a point.  So for Garza's current campaign contributions total, what percentage is $32,700 of the total?  Is it 0.62% or something more significant to the total. 

We know Soros grossly overfunded him in the last election as both a percentage of his funding and in gross dollar amounts compared to normal campaign funding for those running for Austin DA.  So what percentage is Soros of his current campaign contributions (new, not carry over)?

And whether Soros is good or bad is a different discussion for the cloak room.  I won't meet you there.

[ztejas 43608]

On 3/6/2024 at 8:34 AM, HenryJames said:

Only $58,000, huh?

D.A. Challenger Funded Primarily by Right Wing Donors, Wealthy West Austinites: Jeremy Sylestine leads José Garza in January fundraising - News - The Austin Chronicle

I wouldn't give a fuck if Ted Cruz wrote him a check for $5 million.

Identity/association politics are so fucking stupid. 

[PvilleStang 2923]

9 minutes ago, royiv said:

 

Approximately 0.62% of the amount that Abbott accepted from Jeff Yass and 1.2% of the amount accepted by Dan Patrick from Defend Texas Liberty PAC whose main supporter is Tim Dunn. 
 

BUT SOROS!!!!

The old toolbag was a majority contributor to the only listed PAC that donated this go-round to Jose.  Again, out of district / state money influencing the election.  I'd much rather see someone from the other side of the aisle donating to the opposing party's campaign than some shitbag masquerading his money as "Texas [in]Justice & Public Safety PAC".

[ztejas 43608]

6 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

The other guy would have been a new version of the same shit.

This is a little cynical for my taste and there's no way of knowing that. Garza sucks to the extent that someone else should at least get a shot. If the next guy is just as bad or worse then vote him out next cycle.

That's how democracy is supposed to work. Does it work that way? Not really - but the "what's the point in voting" attitude isn't what we need, either. 

Maybe we'll get lucky and one of the deranged psychos allowed to roam the streets will shiv Garza on his way into work. 

[royiv 9403]

17 minutes ago, ABSR said:

What percent is it to the total that Biden has collected or Trump?  Because comparing local DA contribution amounts to other larger elections is super helpful and insightful. 

You may or may not have a point.  So for Garza's current campaign contributions total, what percentage is $32,700 of the total?  Is it 0.62% or something more significant to the total. 

We know Soros grossly overfunded him in the last election as both a percentage of his funding and in gross dollar amounts compared to normal campaign funding for those running for Austin DA.  So what percentage is Soros of his current campaign contributions (new, not carry over)?

And whether Soros is good or bad is a different discussion for the cloak room.  I won't meet you there.

 

16 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

The old toolbag was a majority contributor to the only listed PAC that donated this go-round to Jose.  Again, out of district / state money influencing the election.  I'd much rather see someone from the other side of the aisle donating to the opposing party's campaign than some shitbag masquerading his money as "Texas [in]Justice & Public Safety PAC".

Look, I’m no fan of Garza. If I lived in Travis County I would have voted against him, just like I did against Ogg in Harris County (oh, noes Soros also donated to her opponent). But pointing out Soros contributions while ignoring shitbag billionaires on the other side is disingenuous at best.

[PvilleStang 2923]

10 minutes ago, royiv said:

 

Look, I’m no fan of Garza. If I lived in Travis County I would have voted against him, just like I did against Ogg in Harris County (oh, noes Soros also donated to her opponent). But pointing out Soros contributions while ignoring shitbag billionaires on the other side is disingenuous at best.

I'm pointing that out because that's the only narrative going around: Jeremy was funded by the Westlake / Rollingwood big donors.  The media has beaten that narrative to death while not mentioning anything about Garza donors.  

See: 

EDITED:

 

Also noted this from the article:

Quote

Garza’s January filing was much less interesting (no George Soros donations this round). He took in just over $39,000 – perhaps because he entered the primary with a mountain of cash on hand. He spent $112,000, which left him with about $158,000 in cash as of Jan. 25.

Garza’s largest donations were for $5,000 and he received three of them. One from John Dismukes, a co-owner of the Armadillo World Headquarters, one from local criminal defense attorney Brad Vinson, and one from local healthcare attorney Carlos Zaffirini. All three have a history of contributing to national and state level Democrats. Zaffirini has also given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans

took in 39K in January, 37,200 from the PAC Soros funds.  That's the Austin Chronicle for you...

Edited March 7 by PvilleStang

[royiv 9403]

9 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

I'm pointing that out because that's the only narrative going around: Jeremy was funded by the Westlake / Rollingwood big donors.  The media has beaten that narrative to death while not mentioning anything about Garza donors.  

See: 

EDITED:

 

Also noted this from the article:

took in 39K in January, 37,200 from the PAC Soros funds.  That's the Austin Chronicle for you...

Again, Abbott accepted the largest donation EVER to a single candidate in the state of Texas from an out of state donor. You bitch about Soros all the time, but ignore the role of billionaires on both sides of the aisle. Fixing campaign finance should be a bipartisan issues. Bitching about one side while ignoring the other does nothing to advance the agenda of campaign finance reform.

[Deej 77005]

36 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Maybe we'll get lucky and one of the deranged psychos allowed to roam the streets will shiv Garza on his way into work.

[TKthunder2 5012]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

Again, Abbott accepted the largest donation EVER to a single candidate in the state of Texas from an out of state donor. You bitch about Soros all the time, but ignore the role of billionaires on both sides of the aisle. Fixing campaign finance should be a bipartisan issues. Bitching about one side while ignoring the other does nothing to advance the agenda of campaign finance reform.

I don’t like that either BUT governors, senators, and congressmen have NATIONAL implications and impact. A local race like say with the district attorney, city, council, or mayor is not the same. I wish we’d roll back all these dumbass dark money super pacs but that’s likely a conversation for the CR which even I wouldn’t want to read.

[chainsaw 9891]

Do we even know that Soros asked for the 37k to go to Garza? It seems far more likely that these PACs are formed and then beg for money from the usual suspects. What the PACs do after getting the money is not necessarily dictated by the BMD.

This particular PAC seems to have a more general goal of keeping progressive DAs statewide, and not simply a slush fund dedicated solely to Garza's campaign.

Sylestine was well-funded and his camp believed Travis county voters wanted a change. They were wrong. That's democracy for you.

[royiv 9403]

7 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

I don’t like that either BUT governors, senators, and congressmen have NATIONAL implications and impact. A local race like say with the district attorney, city, council, or mayor is not the same. I wish we’d roll back all these dumbass dark money super pacs but that’s likely a conversation for the CR which even I wouldn’t want to read.

The governor of Texas is not elected to represent the interests of Pennsylvania’s richest man.

[royiv 9403]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

Sylestine was well-funded and his camp believed Travis county voters wanted a change. They were wrong. That's democracy for you.

That’s what’s crazy to me. In both Harris and Travis Counties, there was an ineffective incumbent candidate for DA. In one county, the incumbent lost in a landslide. In the other, the opposite. I was really surprised at the result in Travis County given Garza’s record. In Harris County, voters were clear that we’re tired of her ineffective bullshit.

[PvilleStang 2923]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Sylestine was well-funded and his camp believed Travis county voters wanted a change. They were wrong. That's democracy for you.

Eh, with around 89% of voters staying home for the primaries, I wouldn't call that an affirmation of Garza's job performance.  I bet if you polled most voters, his approval rating would be on the low side, but people are just too lazy to get off their asses and do anything about it.

[chainsaw 9891]

11 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

Eh, with around 89% of voters staying home for the primaries, I wouldn't call that an affirmation of Garza's job performance.  I bet if you polled most voters, his approval rating would be on the low side, but people are just too lazy to get off their asses and do anything about it.

Could be. But I still can't think of anything that held Sylestine back. He had everything he needed to win.

[Brisketexan 105482]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Could be. But I still can't think of anything that held Sylestine back. He had everything he needed to win.

I mean....he probably could have used some more votes.  So, he didn't really have EVERYTHING he needed to win.

[chainsaw 9891]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I mean....he probably could have used some more votes.  So, he didn't really have EVERYTHING he needed to win.

I guess if I wanted to make a sports comparison, his team had no excuse for losing other than the fact that it was inferior to the opposing team, which is less of an "excuse" and more of "the point of elections."

[MAUFRAIS 6669]

He lost because his name sounds weird.

[Bozo_Casanova 26614]

3 hours ago, ztejas said:

the next guy is just as bad or worse then vote him out next cycle.

That's how democracy is supposed to work.

I fundamentally agree, I just didn’t have high hopes for him or any other elected DA.

[Bozo_Casanova 26614]

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Could be. But I still can't think of anything that held Sylestine back. He had everything he needed to win.

Not to be glib, but it was the voters that held him back.

[Brisketexan 105482]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

I fundamentally agree, I just didn’t have high hopes for him or any other elected DA.

You can elect competent DAs who are actually good at the job.  Plenty of jurisdictions have over the years, including this one in the past.

The problem is when it becomes a hyper-politicized job (in either direction, by the way -- plenty of shitty "WAR ON CRIME!  I'LL GET EVERYONE LOCKED UP FOR LIFE!" DAs in Texas in recent decades).  It used to be that in most cases, while it was a "political" job, it was usually run for and taken by someone who knew the ropes, and actually wanted to perform the job, which is hard and ministerial in large part.

[chainsaw 9891]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Not to be glib, but it was the voters that held him back.

We are in full agreement. He lost for reasons he could not control: the voters don't want him.

[Brisketexan 105482]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

We are in full agreement. He lost for reasons he could not control: the voters don't want him.

"The people have spoken - the bastards."

[Paper_jam 838]

I'd probably be OK with (or, at worst, apathetic about) Garza having a position on city council or as a state rep.  I agree with those above that the office of DA isn't really where I want policy to be made. The DA's job is to prosecute criminals.

I doubt some of the sensational negative claims about Garza are true, and Austin's overall crime statistics still compare favorably with almost any other city of equal size. But I don't want the general public (including the criminal segment) even having a perception that Austin is "soft on crime."

My tolerance level is lower now that recently me, and people close to me, have been victims of mail theft, hit and run, bank jugging, vehicle break-ins, cat converter theft,  etc.  It seems like those kinds of crimes are rarely investigated or prosecuted. I've been fortunate to live almost all of my 50+ years, without being a victim of crime. But the last few years have been different, and not in a good way.

 

Edited March 7 by Paper_jam

[wd40 1976]

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

We are in full agreement. He lost for reasons he could not control: the voters don't want him.

very possible he won because effective campaigning claiming the other guy was a MAGA-funded?  Garza, as a self-styled progressive sure does love killing trees.  I got shit in the mail from him almost every day.  for those that chose to vote in the Blue Team primary, with that "information" in mind, it would be no choice at all.

in a non-primary election there's no way Garza wins....unless the Red Team guy is a MAGAdouche running in Travis Co.

meanwhile some people may have thought more strategically and chosen to vote in the R primary simply to scuttle dickheads like Lyin' Ted.  fat lotta good that did, as it turns out.  it is truly depressing that the masses of California shitbirds flooding into this state couldn't be bothered to help break the cult.  thank you, you can go back home now.  dumbasses.

[chainsaw 9891]

30 minutes ago, wd40 said:

In a non-primary election there's no way Garza wins....unless the Red Team guy is a MAGAdouche running in Travis Co.

They could have propped up a moderate republican then. But for the record, I don't think any republican would win a countywide race in Travis County.

[ztejas 43608]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

You can elect competent DAs who are actually good at the job.  Plenty of jurisdictions have over the years, including this one in the past.

The problem is when it becomes a hyper-politicized job (in either direction, by the way -- plenty of shitty "WAR ON CRIME!  I'LL GET EVERYONE LOCKED UP FOR LIFE!" DAs in Texas in recent decades).  It used to be that in most cases, while it was a "political" job, it was usually run for and taken by someone who knew the ropes, and actually wanted to perform the job, which is hard and ministerial in large part.

Yeah but isn't Sylestine like a normal, fairly left dem?

I'd just like for people killing other people to spend some amount of time in prison. 

I guess that's a tough ask. 

[ztejas 43608]

1 hour ago, Paper_jam said:

and Austin's overall crime statistics still compare favorably with almost any other city of equal size.

That's always been true and would be true regardless of the DA.

FYI - our violent/sex crime rates our low but our property crime is not and never has been. The former is obviously more the DA's wheelhouse but still. There is no ghetto in Austin. There is no hood on the other side of the train tracks that you don't go to. It's always been safe. 

[ChickenSandwich 9856]

 

[B00M 6520]

21 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

Can we get per capita numbers? Any time raw numbers are presented regarding a population, I’m assuming the source is either dumb or lying 

Edited March 8 by B00M
APD…… why not both?

[ztejas 43608]

1 minute ago, B00M said:

Can we get per capita numbers? Any time raw numbers are presented regarding a population, I’m assuming the source is either dumb or lying 

I don't think the population went up 94% between 2018 and 2021.

I will say it's a fairly cherry-picked set of data.

Edited March 8 by ztejas

[Brisketexan 105482]

I don't think the population went up 94% between 2018 and 2021.
I will say it's a fairly cherry-picked set of data.

It is. The increases shown track the national trends for the same period. In other words, Austin wasn’t an outlier one way or the other.

[ChickenSandwich 9856]

Garza started in 2021 I believe 
 

[B00M 6520]

16 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I don't think the population went up 94% between 2018 and 2021.

I will say it's a fairly cherry-picked set of data.

Agreed, but if the data is truly compelling, you normalize for population. regardless brisket brings up a good point, covid definitely fucked us up

[ChickenSandwich 9856]

18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It is. The increases shown track the national trends for the same period. In other words, Austin wasn’t an outlier one way or the other.

For comparison Chicago went from 1,905 - 2,152 homicides over the same time period. An increase of about 13%. 
 

https://www.illinoispolicy.org/chicago-homicides-in-2022-up-43-above-pre-pandemic-levels/

 

https://news.wttw.com/2024/01/02/shootings-homicides-chicago-drop-13-2023-and-returned-pre-pandemic-levels-violence

[David Dennison 18994]

That darn George Soros.

[Bozo_Casanova 26614]

2 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

Source: Austin police department 

responsibility: Austin police department 

[Helobious 9479]

2 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

That’s not bad at all for a city that big honestly. Article from 2022 about SA:

 

Quote

His death resulted from the kind of hotheaded, spontaneous violence that officials say has fueled San Antonio’s increase in homicides in 2021 and this year.

The city’s homicide rate has risen drastically over the past several years, to 10.5 murders per 100,000 people in 2021. However, its rate remains one of the lowest among major Texas cities.

Houston had the highest homicide rate among large Texas cities in 2021, with 19.8 homicides per 100,000 people, followed by Dallas and Fort Worth, according to data collected by the FBI. Austin had the lowest rate, at 7.8 per 100,000 people.

Across all major cities, except Dallas, the number of murders increased from 2020 to 2021. Last year marked the deadliest one for Houston and San Antonio in the last 30 years.

This year, the San Antonio Police Department recorded 195 homicides, or roughly 13 per 100,000 people, through September

https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Homicide-rate-San-Antonio-Texas-17649074.php

[PvilleStang 2923]

The numbers are not black and white here.  For one, half of 2020 was pretty dang quiet, crime wise.  Second, after defunding, APD stepped back from proactive policing and went into reactive mode, causing crime stats to drop on paper.  On top of that, the DA refusing to prosecute led to less citations / arrests for some of the lower level crimes.  911 calls being deferred to 311, 311 not generating crime reports, etc.  It's not a good comparison to use crime stats from the two eras.

 

Also, think of all those @Nicole44 victims in the last couple years they wrote off as accidental drownings.  There's a good handful of murders missing from the stat sheets.

[YGIFS 19453]

I wouldn’t say she’s been missing them, Bob

[PvilleStang 2923]

Almost forgot, for Garza's vendetta on Cops: the latest two Wilco Sheriffs were found NOT GUILTY last night.  That's exactly 0 cops he's been able to throw behind bars.

[HenryJames 66228]

Was this the case where the entire incident was recorded by some reality tv cop show but somehow the footage got destroyed before it could be used as evidence?

[Orange&White 5539]

That is the one.

I am more curious as to why the case against Robert Chody seems to have all but disappeared. No news on it in over a year.

[PvilleStang 2923]

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/crime/austin-police-swat-merle-drive/269-c7c62924-f455-45b6-b3e2-a5137b4bc270

This one was interesting, too.  I'm interested if anyone has the dude's name yet, and what his priors are.  Several tweeting he was out on bond when this happened.  Sorry for partying?

 

Quote

AUSTIN, Texas — A man is in custody following an hourslong SWAT standoff in South Austin.

According to the Austin Police Department, they received a burglary hotshot call just before 12 p.m. Wednesday at a home near Merle Drive and West Ben White Boulevard.

When officers arrived at the home, police said they learned a naked man forced his way into the home and assaulted one of the residents.

 

Police believe at least two people were inside the home at the time and were able to get out of the home safely. After the residents got out, the homeowner told police that there were several loaded firearms inside the home, which led to APD's SWAT team coming to the scene.

After nearly three hours, the man surrendered and was taken to the Travis County Jail where he faces a felony burglary charge, according to police.

Residents in the area reported gunfire during the standoff, but police said those reports may have been caused by "distractionary" devices used by officers during the incident.

Meanwhile, police said they're unsure if the man was intoxicated or suffering from a mental crisis at the time of the incident.

Per the spaceman:

Quote

When she turned around, a naked man holding a drug pipe and a butane torch lighter was standing in her living room, she said. She tried talking to him, she said, but he appeared to be high on drugs because his eyes were darting back and forth and he wasn't able to say anything coherent.