We have two candidates for County District Attorney.
Both are attorneys.
There is turmoil here, in that high level members of one party are now charged with bribery and corruption, for good reason. They've been using "Pay to Play" tactics, seriously rewarding their best campaign contributors with lucrative no-bid contracts. In several cases, relatives of these politicians have been given 6-figure no-show jobs "working" for the companies getting those contracts.
It is very important to me that the prosecutions move forward.
(1) This fine lady has been head of the largest town in the county for 8 years, during which time the town has had no tax increases, has consistently maintained a balanced budget, and has an excellent credit rating. She has zero courtroom experience, never prosecuted or defended anyone.
But she is politically connected.
(2) This lady took over as acting D.A. when the former D.A. was elected to a State position, and she has been actively pursuing the cases against the corrupt politicians.
Who do you think should win the position, and why?
__________________
The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.
TWO - being the DA requires trial experience and a true understanding of the day to day issues her ADAs will face. A DA should not be a political position, but one based on experience and know how. But I know they turn it into a political position - which is wrong, IMO.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
