The Pacific Northwest’s Anti-Democracy Progressives

Seattle, which is home to Amazon and Microsoft, currently employs some 193,000 well-compensated Washingtonians working in the tech sector. One major reason that Seattle emerged as the first big tech hub outside of California is obvious: It is the only West Coast state with no state income tax. Its state constitution forbids an income tax. High wage workers and entrepreneurs seeking a piece of the relatively laid back, outdoors-focused Pacific Northwest lifestyle can move to Washington without taking a state-mandated pay cut.

For the progressive Democrats who dominate state politics in the Pacific Northwest, money in the pockets of anyone other than the government and its political allies is wasted. To grab more of it, legislative Democrats in Washington are pushing through an income tax in the guise of a “millionaire’s tax” that would levy a 9.9% tax on incomes over $1 million. Just yesterday, as the “millionaire’s tax” neared the finish line in the Washington legislature, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced he and his wife have relocated from Seattle, where they lived for 47 years, to Miami. Florida has neither a state income tax nor a state income tax masquerading as a “millionaire’s tax.”

The constitutionality of the bill rests on progressives’ expectation that the Washington Supreme Court will completely abandon decades of precedent deeming income taxes unconstitutional. The expectation may not be unfounded: Five of nine justices were appointed by Democratic governors. Democrats also voted down an amendment to forbid applying an income tax to lower income levels, signaling the “millionaire’s tax” is likely to become a “thousandaire’s tax” if Democrats get their way.

What makes this proposed tax truly egregious, however, is its attempt to stop voters from having any say in it. The Democrats’ tax bill includes a necessity clause that precludes a voter referendum that could overturn the new income tax. So long as the majority-progressive-appointed state Supreme Court goes along, progressives will have upended 90 years of constitutionally prohibited income taxes while shielding it from a vote of the people.

Additionally, Washington progressives have taken a brazen step to undermine local governance in the state. The state house just passed a bill giving unelected bureaucrats appointed by the governor the power to remove any elected sheriff in the state based on vague guidelines, overriding local voters’ ability to select their own law enforcement. The move is an effort to exert progressive control of sheriffs in rural parts of the state who have questioned unpopular and difficult-to-enforce laws, such as COVID restrictions and gun regulations.

Not to be outdone by its neighbor to the north, Oregon’s progressive governance is also thumbing its nose at the will of the voters. The Beaver State, which has made itself into an economic backwater, has long levied high state income taxes, driving businesses and people who earn money for a living out of state. (The state’s second largest business, the $12 billion Dutch Brothers coffee chain, left the state last year, taking its corporate tax revenue with it.) The state’s economy, always tenuous, is now crumbling. Oregon’s unemployment rate of 5.2% is third worst in the nation, better than only California (5.5%) and New Jersey (5.4%). Layoffs since the beginning of 2025 are comparable to job losses during the Great Recession.

Oregon progressives charge forward undaunted. The Democratic legislative supermajority voted in February to disconnect Oregon’s tax code from the federal code so the state can continue to tax job-creating business investment at the higher rate eschewed by D.C. Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill. The disconnect will not help attract the investors needed to stabilize Portland’s cratering downtown real estate market, where values, when buyers can be found, are a fraction of what they were five years ago. Investors recently rated Portland as the worst place in the country to invest in real estate other than Hartford, Connecticut. 

Punitive rates of income taxation are not enough for Oregon Democrats. For the past year, they’ve tried to muscle through the largest tax increase in state history. It is a deeply unpopular package consisting of fuel tax increases to pay for more unionized transportation workers and a doubling of the state payroll tax to fund public transportation – even though the state is shedding jobs at an historic rate and such a massive payroll tax will only make things worse.

Keep reading

Virginia Democrats Already Pushing Sweeping Gun Control After Being in Office for Barely a Month

It begins. Democrats in Virginia have been in power for barely a month and they are already pushing sweeping new gun control laws.

To make matters worse, they are doing this at a time when the country has seen four terrorist attacks on the homeland in the span of just two weeks. God forbid the American people are able to defend themselves from all of the potential terrorists that Democrats imported into the country on Joe Biden’s watch.

This is all about control.

FOX News reports:

Virginia Dems send sweeping gun ban to Spanberger as West Virginia weighs expanding machine-gun access

Virginia Democrats have sent a sweeping gun-control package to Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s desk, while West Virginia lawmakers are debating the opposite approach — a proposal that would allow residents to lawfully obtain machine guns.

The dueling efforts highlight how sharply gun policy is diverging across the old Virginia border. More than 160 years after West Virginia split from Virginia during the Civil War, the two states are again charting very different political paths — with Democrats in Richmond advancing new firearm restrictions while Republicans in Charleston explore expanding Second Amendment rights.

Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger signaled she looks forward to “reviewing” the sweeping firearms ban from state Sen. Saddam Salim, D-Dunn Loring, when it reaches her desk next week.

“As the mother of three daughters in Virginia public schools and a former federal law enforcement officer who carried a gun every day, Governor Spanberger knows how important it is to make sure kids and families are safe,” Spanberger’s office said in a statement to Richmond’s ABC affiliate.

“The governor is grateful for the efforts of legislators and advocates to address gun violence in Virginia communities, and she looks forward to reviewing all legislation that comes to her desk.”

Some pro-gun activists in the state have responded by handing out free AR-15 magazines.

Keep reading

Ohio Democrat’s Allegation of Kennedy Center Exclusion Debunked After Email Found in Her Spam Folder

Questions over whether Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH) had been excluded from a Kennedy Center board meeting emerged after she accused President Donald Trump and the Kennedy Center’s board of leaving her out, though court filings later indicated the invitation had been sent and was found in her personal email spam folder.

CNN reporter Betsy Klein posted about the development on X, writing: “In today’s edition of Washington is Veep: A Democratic congresswoman made a legal complaint against President Donald Trump for, in part, excluding her from an upcoming Kennedy Center board meeting. The invitation, it turned out, was in her spam folder. Aide filed an update today.”

Klein also shared a screenshot from a court filing describing how the email was ultimately located. The filing states: “On March 6, 2026, after learning that Defendant’s counsel represented to the Court that the Center sent the notice to Congresswoman Beatty’s personal email address, I asked Congresswoman Beatty to search her personal email. She was able to locate the notice in the spam folder of her personal email address.”

Roma Daravi, vice president of public relations for the Kennedy Center, responded in a quote tweet: “Did the dog also eat her homework?”

The issue surfaced as Beatty pursues legal action related to governance of the Kennedy Center. According to reporting from The Hill, the Ohio Democrat’s attorneys initially stated in court filings that she had not been invited to a March 16 meeting where a proposed renovation of the center is expected to be discussed.

The Justice Department noted the invitation had been sent, and Beatty’s legal team later confirmed it had been delivered but landed in the spam folder of her personal email account. Her lawyers wrote in a filing that the congresswoman “appreciates Defendants’ confirmation that she can attend the meeting at the White House.”

Beatty told reporters invitations to Kennedy Center board meetings typically go to her scheduler and chief of staff rather than her personal email. She explained her chief of staff had stopped receiving the emails months earlier and her scheduler did not receive the March 16 invitation. After the hearing, her attorney Norm Eisen revealed the message had been caught by a spam filter, speaking to reporters, “I doubt there’s a single person here who hasn’t had an email vanished somewhere in a spam filter. That’s what happened here.”

The dispute arose during a hearing before U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper over Beatty’s request for a temporary restraining order tied to a Kennedy Center board meeting. Beatty, an ex officio trustee, argues she should be allowed to participate and vote on plans involving the institution.

In court filings, Justice Department lawyer William Jankowski wrote that Beatty “will not be permitted to vote” because board procedures distinguish ex officio trustees from governing trustees.

Cooper said he would take the motion under advisement and aim to rule quickly, calling the proposed overhaul of the performing arts venue “a pretty big deal” for what he described as the nation’s premier performing arts center.

In December 2025, the Democratic lawmaker sued President Trump and members of the center’s board after the institution was renamed to include Trump’s name. Beatty has contended that Congress alone has the authority to change the institution’s name and maintained she had been muted during the board call when the decision was made.

Keep reading

Democrats Already Plotting Investigations of Companies, Colleges, and Law Firms for Working With Trump

Democrats in the Senate and the House are apparently already planning to investigate companies, schools, and even law firms for the crime of working with President Trump.

For months, all we have heard from these people is that Trump is on a revenge tour. And what are they doing right now? They’re plotting their revenge on America tour.

These people are stuck in a loop. They are still trying to ‘get Trump’ when the rest of the country moved on long ago. Trump won the popular vote and all of the swing states, but Democrats simply refuse to accept that.

Breitbart News reports:

Democrats in both chambers of Congress are plotting potential investigations into companies, colleges, and even law firms that worked with the Trump administration, according to a report.

Axios reported that Democrats are in the early stages of planning to use their subpoena power if they take power after the 2026 midterm elections.

Sens. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), all of whom serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, have been involved in the preliminary discussions, according to Axios.

Schiff led the first impeachment effort against President Donald Trump as Democrats falsely alleged that the president colluded with Russia during the 2016 presidential election cycle.

The outlet claimed that both Republican and Democrat lawmakers believe that the House is likely to come under control of the Democrat Party after the midterms. The House has broader subpoena authority than the Senate.

While Democrats expect the Trump administration to fight back against investigations, companies, colleges, and other private citizens do not have the same institutional power to fight back against the Democrats’ potential investigations. Democrats would likely investigate why major institutions chose to work with the Trump administration. Axios said they would likely choose to investigate donations for the East Wing renovation as well as funding agreements involving institutions of higher education.

This is all the Democrats have to offer.

Keep reading

Member of Jasmine Crockett’s Security Detail Killed in Standoff with Dallas SWAT Officers

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett’s security officer was fatally shot by Dallas SWAT officers this week.

The security officer, Mike King, was a fugitive after impersonating a law enforcement officer.

King was killed in his garage during a standoff with Dallas SWAT officers on Wednesday night.

According to CBS News, he drove a “replica undercover police vehicle” with license plates “stolen from cars outside a military recruiting office.”

King reportedly has an extensive criminal history.

It is unclear how King was able to serve as Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s security detail despite his criminal background.

CBS reported:

A man shot and killed by Dallas police earlier this week was a familiar figure in North Texas law enforcement – and part of the security detail for U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, sources told CBS News Texas.

Multiple law enforcement sources tell CBS News Texas the man, known publicly as Mike King, had been using aliases while running a business that placed officers in off‑duty jobs.

King was killed Wednesday night after a standoff with Dallas police SWAT officers. Police say he fled into a hospital parking garage, barricaded himself inside a vehicle, and was forced out by tear gas before pulling a gun on officers.

Sources say he was wanted for impersonating a law enforcement officer and had claimed to be one while operating Off Duty Police Services, an online platform connecting North Texas officers with off‑duty work. Authorities have not released his real name.

Keep reading

HUH? Dem Senator Elissa Slotkin Says ‘We Must Fund the Department of Homeland Security’ Right After She Voted Against It

This week, after the terror attack on a synagogue in Michigan, Dem Senator Elissa Slotkin stood in front of TV cameras and said that we need to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which is odd considering she voted against doing that just hours before then.

Democrats are putting American lives at risk with their little shutdown game.

If we had a competent media, someone might ask Ms. Slotkin to explain her comments versus her actions.

The Daly Caller reported:

Democratic Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin changed her tune on funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Friday after a Lebanese national attacked a Metro Detroit synagogue.

DHS identified the deceased suspect who attacked the Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Michigan, as Ayman Mohamed Ghazali, a Lebanese native who became a U.S. citizen in 2016. Slotkin, who voted in favor of continuing the partial shutdown of DHS on Thursday, said during a press conference that DHS needs to be funded because it is an “essential” agency.

“I would say the department, because they are essential workers, they have been at work,” Slotkin said. “Certainly in Michigan, we have a ton of DHS folks, CBP and so they are on the call and they are doing their jobs. Certainly, we need to fund the Department of Homeland Security and we need, in my view, to cut away all the conversation on ICE, which is its own conversation, from all of the core missions at the Department of Homeland Security. But they’re essential, they are on the job and they are working today.”

Keep reading

Hawaiian Dem Rep Brags It Was ‘Easy’ to Put Illegal Aliens Ahead of Taxpaying Americans

Democratic Rep. Jill Tokuda addressed a question from a constituent during a public discussion about her decision not to stand during a moment at the State of the Union when members of Congress were asked to show support for a statement about prioritizing American citizens.

The exchange occurred after a constituent identified as Arlene asked Tokuda to explain why she remained seated during the moment.

Arlene referenced a question posed during the address in which lawmakers were asked to stand if they supported a specific statement about the role of the U.S. government.

“State of the Union last month, there was a question from the president asked of all the congressional members in the audience, and they asked everyone to stand if they were in agreement with this statement,” Arlene said.

She continued by quoting the statement presented to members of Congress during the address.

“And the statement was the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens. I’m quoting that, and I noticed you did not stand, and I’d like to know your reasoning, why you did not stand?”

Tokuda responded to the question by thanking the constituent and explaining the reasoning behind her decision during the event.

Keep reading

Even the Left Is Tired Of Her: Ilhan Omar Gets Major Primary Challenge From Anti-ICE Lawyer

Perhaps it’s not surprising that liberal Minneapolis prosecutor Julie Le, who went viral for telling a judge “this job sucks” in protest of immigration enforcement is looking for a new job. It’s also not surprising the new job she’s seeking is that of a lawmaker running on an anti-ICE platform.

What is surprising is who the Democrat is taking on: Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, the left’s most obnoxious sacred cow.

As the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported Thursday, the former federal attorney who lashed out at a judge over ICE enforcement during Operation Metro Surge is gunning for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. House in Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District.

“Former Assistant Chief Counsel at the Department of Homeland Security and former Special Assistant United States Attorney at the United States Attorney’s Office, Julie T. Le has witnessed firsthand the failures of our broken immigration system,” her campaign website reads.

“Now she’s running for Congress to fight for real reform — and to fight for quality education and accessible healthcare for all families … Her vision is clear: Inspire Unity — a government that works for everyone, bringing people together to solve our greatest challenges through comprehensive immigration reform, education funding, and accessible healthcare for all families.”

“Julie’s campaign is centered on immigration reform that balances border security with a fair pathway to citizenship for those who contribute to society,” a media release from Le’s campaign said, according to Minnesota Public Radio.

Of course, this whole run wouldn’t have been possible if it weren’t for the fact that Le effectively crashed out of public service during a Feb. 3 hearing in which she had what could charitably be described as an — ahem — episode.

Telling the judge that she had “stupidly” accepted the assignment with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota, she all but begged the judge to penalize her so she could get a mental health day:

“Sometime I wish you would just hold me in contempt, your honor, so that I can have full 24 hours of sleep,” she said.

“What do you want me to do? The system sucks. This job sucks,” she added.

Le was quickly removed from the detail, according to the New York Post.

Keep reading

Harris for Peace? Neocons Exist on BOTH Sides

The Democrats are taking to the media to declare that war could have been prevented has Kamala Harris won the election. That narrative is convenient politically, but it ignores what the politicians themselves actually said. The desire for confrontation with Iran has existed on both sides of the political spectrum for decades. The problem is not simply one president or one party. The problem is the bipartisan foreign policy establishment that has long treated Iran as the central strategic enemy in the Middle East. The neocons exist on both sides.

During the 2024 campaign, Kamala Harris herself made the position very clear. When asked which country she considered the United States’ greatest adversary, she replied that the answer was “Iran.” That statement alone shows how deeply the Iran war narrative had already taken hold in Washington. Once a country is publicly framed as the primary adversary, the policy direction becomes predictable. Sanctions escalate, proxy conflicts expand, and eventually military confrontation becomes increasingly likely.

Yet now many of the same politicians who previously described Iran as America’s top enemy are suddenly condemning the war. Harris has recently criticized the Trump administration’s actions toward Iran, arguing against the escalation of the conflict. The shift in tone is typical Washington politics. When out of power, politicians oppose the war. When in power, the same establishment often supports it. “Let me be clear,” Harris wrote in a statement shared on the social platform X. “I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice.”

Keep reading

Liberal ‘Expert’ Completely Crumbles When Asked the Simplest Question on Earth

Sen. Bernie Moreno questioned a policy witness about illegal immigration during a hearing, pressing him on whether entering the United States without permission should be considered a crime.

The exchange occurred during a discussion on immigration policy, where Moreno repeatedly asked Brendan Duke whether he believed unlawful entry into the country should carry criminal consequences.

Moreno began the questioning with a direct inquiry.

“Do you think it should be a crime to enter the country illegally?” Moreno asked.

Duke responded by saying he was unfamiliar with the issue.

“I don’t know anything about this,” Duke said.

Moreno followed up by clarifying that he was not asking a legal technical question but rather seeking Duke’s personal view.

“You don’t have to, look I’m not a lawyer. You don’t have to be a lawyer. It’s a simple question: should it be a crime?” Moreno said.

“I’ll say it slowly. Should it be a crime to enter the United States of America illegally without permission?”

Duke again replied that he did not know.

“I don’t know anything about this,” Duke said.

Keep reading