Judge Robert Schaffer reportedly has $260,158.28 sitting inside his campaign account right now. According to his "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" filed on 1/16/2024, Judge Schaffer received $82,295.20 in contributions and incurred $47,050.99 in expenditures. You can "CLICK HERE" to view his complete "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which was filed under penalty of perjury.
Attorney TaKasha Francis reportedly only has $2,300.00 in her campaign account right now. According to her "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" filed on 1/15/2024, Attorney Francis received $2,300.00 in contributions and incurred $0 in expenditures, which raises several questions. How did Attorney TaKasha Francis pay her filing fee when she filed to run for District Judge, for the 152nd Civil District Court, in the upcoming Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Democratic Party Primary? You can "CLICK HERE" to view her complete "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which was filed under penalty of perjury.
Judge Robert Schaffer Reportedly Has $260,158 Cash on Hand; Attorney TaKasha Francis Only Has $2,300 Cash on Hand
AUBREY R. TAYLOR REPORTS©
The investigative team for Aubrey R. Taylor Communications has just finished reviewing the most recent campaign finance reports that were filed by Judge Robert Schaffer, the presiding judge for the 152nd Civil District Court in Harris County, Texas, and his Democratic Party Primary challenger, by the name of TaKasha Francis.
Judge Robert Schaffer filed his report on 1/16/2024, under penalty of perjury, and Attorney TaKasha Francis filed her report on 1/15/2024 under penalty of perjury.
The reports filed by Judge Robert Schaffer and Attorney TaKasha Francis were supposed to cover all of the "CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES" that each candidate incurred between 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023, as they prepare for their impending showdown in the upcoming Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Democratic Party Primary race for District Judge, 152nd Civil District Court.
"TAKASHA FRANCIS."
The campaign finance report that was filed on 1/15/2024, by Attorney TaKasha Francis, which covered 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023, does not show any expenditures, which was very surprising.
Attorney TaKasha Francis signed up to run for the 152nd Civil District Court on the final day of the filing period, which was on Monday, December 11, 2023, to secure her place on the upcoming Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Democratic Party Primary ballot. However, her "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" does not show how Attorney TaKasha Francis paid her filing fee to secure her place on the ballot. Did she pay a filing fee? Who paid the filing fee? Why isn't there a filing fee noted in the "EXPENDITURE" section of the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which she filed back on January 15, 2024, under penalty of perjury, with the Secretary of State?
https://www.francisforjudge.com/
The website that is published online by Attorney TaKasha Francis, has the correct disclaimer, which states, "Political advertising paid for by TaKasha Francis For Judge in voluntary compliance with the Judicial Campaign Fairness Act." However, the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" that was filed by Attorney TaKasha Francis, on 1/15/2024, and covers the period of 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023, does not show any "EXPENDITURES" or how the website was paid for. Nor does her recently filed financial report show how much she paid for the website, or who designed the website.
The website that is published online by Attorney TaKasha Francis, has the correct disclaimer, which states, "Political advertising paid for by TaKasha Francis For Judge in voluntary compliance with the Judicial Campaign Fairness Act." However, the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" that was filed by Attorney TaKasha Francis, on 1/15/2024, and covers the period of 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023, does not show any "EXPENDITURES" or how the website was paid for. Nor does her recently filed financial report show how much she paid for the website, or who designed the website.
Someone by the name of Kidada Gilbert Lewis is listed as the Treasurer for the "TAKASHA FRANCIS FOR JUDGE CAMPAIGN" on the website, and on the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" that was filed by Attorney TaKasha Francis back on 1/15/2024, under penalty of perjury.
"JUDGE SCHAFFER."
After a careful review of the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" that was filed by Judge Robert Schaffer on 1/16/2024, under penalty of perjury it is evidently clear that he is committed to supporting the Harris County Democratic Party.
Back on 12/12/2023, Judge Robert Schafer paid his $2,500.00, filing fee to the Harris County Democratic Party to appear on the upcoming Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Democratic Party Primary ballot. If you look at the "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" that was filed by his Black female challenger (TaKasha Francis) you will quickly see that she did not disclose how she paid for her place to appear on the ballot.
Back on 10/17/2023, Judge Robert Schaffer donated $1,000.00, to the Harris County Democratic Party for some sort of "CEC MEETING SPONSORSHIP" according to his "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which covered 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023.
Back on 10/13/2023, Judge Robert Schaffer donated $10,000.00, to the Harris County Democratic Party for some sort of "GENERAL CONTRIBUTION" according to his "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which covered 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023.
Back on 10/4/2023, Judge Robert Schaffer donated $10,000.00, to the Harris County Democratic Party for some sort of "EVENT SPONSORSHIP" according to his "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" which covered 7/1/2023, through 12/31/2023.
"CLOSING THOUGHTS."
The recent campaign finance report filed by Judge Robert Schaffer, the presiding judge for the 152nd Civil District Court, in Harris County, Texas shows that he has a well-established track record when it comes to supporting the Harris County Democratic Party.
Judge Robert Schaffer's claim that Attorney TaKasha Francis isn't qualified to run against him in the upcoming Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Democratic Party Primary has raised a bunch of eyebrows. However, if a candidate can't fill out their "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" correctly, how can they preside over "MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR JUDGEMENTS" as a Civil District Court Judge?
I'm not trying to say that Attorney TaKasha Francis is unqualified to be a judge. However, her recently filed "CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT" has caused me to look at her candidacy sideways.
AUBREY R. TAYLOR COMMUNICATIONSEMAIL: aubreyrtaylor@gmail.com
AUBREY R. TAYLOR COMMUNICATIONSEMAIL: aubreyrtaylor@gmail.com957 NASA PARKWAY #251
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77058-3039
DIRECT CONTACT:
(281)788-3033
Judge Robert Schaffer (right) is being challenged by Attorney TaKasha Francis, in the race for District Judge, 152nd Civil District Court, in Harris County, Texas. You can "CLICK HERE" to view other contested "SUPER TUESDAY" races on the ballot in Harris County, Texas.
Justice Mike Engelhart is being challenged by Judge Erica Hughes, in the race for District Judge, 151st Civil District Court, in Harris County, Texas. You can "CLICK HERE" to view other contested "SUPER TUESDAY" races on the ballot in Harris County, Texas.
Dr. Carol Swain is a professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University.
THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
DR. CAROL SWAIN
When you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party comes to mind? The Republicans? Or, the Democrats? Most people would probably say the Democrats. But this answer is incorrect.
Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative and has a long history of discrimination.
The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynchings, and fought against the Civil Rights Acts of the 1950s and 1960s.
In contrast, the Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party. Its mission was to stop the spread of slavery into the new western territories to abolish it entirely. This effort, however, was dealt a major blow by the Supreme Court. In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court ruled that slaves weren’t citizens; they were property. The seven justices who voted in favor of slavery? All Democrats. The two justices who dissented? Both Republicans.
The slavery question was, of course, ultimately resolved by a bloody civil war. The commander-in-chief during that war was the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln – the man who freed the slaves.
Six days after the Confederate army surrendered, John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, assassinated President Lincoln. Lincoln’s vice president, a Democrat named Andrew Johnson, assumed the presidency. But Johnson adamantly opposed Lincoln’s plan to integrate the newly freed slaves into the South’s economic and social order.
Johnson and the Democratic Party were unified in their opposition to the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery; the 14th Amendment, which gave blacks citizenship; and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the vote. All three passed only because of universal Republican support.
During the era of Reconstruction, federal troops stationed in the South helped secure rights for the newly freed slaves. Hundreds of black men were elected to southern state legislatures as Republicans, and 22 black Republicans served in the US Congress by 1900. The Democrats did not elect a black man to Congress until 1935.
But after Reconstruction ended, when the federal troops went home, Democrats roared back into power in the South. They quickly reestablished white supremacy across the region with measures like black codes – laws that restricted the ability of blacks to own property and run businesses. And they imposed poll taxes and literacy tests, used to subvert the black citizen’s right to vote.
And how was all of this enforced? By terror -- much of it instigated by the Ku Klux Klan, founded by a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest.
As historian Eric Foner - himself a Democrat - notes:
“In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”
President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, shared many views with the Klan. He re-segregated many federal agencies, and even screened the first movie ever played at the White House - the racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” originally entitled “The Clansman.”
A few decades later, the only serious congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats.
Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill. Less than 70 percent of Democrats did. Democratic senators filibustered the bill for 75 days until Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the logjam.
And when all of their efforts to enslave blacks, keep them enslaved, and then keep them from voting had failed, the Democrats came up with a new strategy: If black people are going to vote, they might as well vote for Democrats. As President Lyndon Johnson was purported to have said about the Civil Rights Act, “I’ll have them n*****s voting Democrat for two hundred years.”
So now, the Democratic Party prospers on the votes of the very people it has spent much of its history oppressing.
Democrats falsely claim that the Republican Party is the villain when in reality it’s the failed policies of the Democratic Party that have kept blacks down. Massive government welfare has decimated the black family. Opposition to school choice has kept them trapped in failing schools. Politically correct policing has left black neighborhoods defenseless against violent crime.
So, when you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party should come to mind?
I’m Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University.
AUBREY R. TAYLOR COMMUNICATIONSEMAIL: aubreyrtaylor@gmail.com957 NASA PARKWAY #251
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77058-3039
DIRECT CONTACT:
(281)788-3033
