Anti-democratic Dems Suggest ‘Disqualifying’ GOP from 2020 Election Over Capitol Riot

If it sounds desperate, it’s because it is.

Democrats have been having a hard time convincing much of the nation that they support free and fair elections of late, and the latest liberal scheme is going to reinforce that stereotype immensely.

In the coming months, the nation will learn whether or not the oft-predicted “red wave” will sweep over Congress, presumably giving the Republicans a majority in both houses and a way to completely stall the Biden administration’s agenda. Given just how tough it has been for the White House to accomplish anything, this possibility seems to be ever more likely.

And so the Democrats, who were accused of “stealing” the 2024 election by and from Donald Trump, are now looking to simply “disqualify” GOP candidates from the midterms…while they still have the congressional power.

Some Democrats are using the anniversary of last year’s Capitol riot on January 6 to launch an effort to win the 2022 midterm elections by disqualifying Republicans who supported the effort to challenge the 2020 elections results as “insurrectionists.”

The effort, spearheaded by Russia hoaxer Marc Elias, aims to use a provision of the post-Civil War 14th Amendment that was crafted to disqualify former Confederates or anyone who “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” from holding federal office. Elias has pushed the effort for months.

The move is s divisive and controversial one, and comes at a time in which the nation is looking to heal as one.

This isn’t the first time that Elias has sought to paint the government blue with broad strokes, having been integral in the effort to politically smear Donald Trump as some sort of Russian asset back in 2016.

https://flagandcross.com/dems-suggest-disqualifying-gop-from-2020-election-over-capitol-riot/

*****************************************

U-Haul Runs Out of Moving Trucks in California as Exodus Continues

U-Haul released its yearly report on Jan. 3. The overall results may not be surprising, but the scope of the report is.

The number of people fleeing governmental tyrannies and economic downturns — the two go hand-in-hand — has risen, the report appears to indicate.

With well over 2 million one-way truck rentals taking place annually, U-Haul is an authority on migration trends. Its network of operations covers all 50 states in the U.S. and 10 provinces of Canada.

Even with approximately 176,000 trucks, 126,000 trailers and 46,000 towing devices at their disposal nationwide, the company still ran out of inventory in California last year. Maybe that’s why the net loss of U-Haul trucks in California wasn’t as severe as in 2020. Nevertheless, California remained at the top of the list for outbound migration. Illinois came in second. Pennsylvania took third.

New York, a haven for criminals, came in sixth place, with Alabama in the fifth position and Massachusetts coming in fourth.

The winners of this contest likely won’t show up to claim their prizes.

All three of the top “winners” have liberal strongholds in major American cities like San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia. All three of the cities are plagued by crime.

Steve Miller, former advisor to President Trump, told Larry Kudlow that the crime surge in Democrat-led cities is “now worse than it has ever been before.”

“There’s nothing compassionate,” Miller said, “about reorienting our entire society for the benefit of the sliver of people in this country who are malicious and violent.”

There’s nothing reasonable about it, either. Going soft on crime and being hostile to law enforcement is not only at war with reason, it’s a sure way to hell where reason becomes an impossibility.

On the other side of the equation, Texas wins first place for the state with the highest growth status. Second goes to Florida, and third place goes to Tennessee, which took first last year. All of these states have strong economies, but that’s not all. They are led by conservatives who don’t cotton to big government. They don’t reward crime. And they push back against draconian measures of the Biden administration.

In Texas, for example, Matt Merrill, U-Haul Area District Vice President of the Dallas Fort-Worth Metroplex and West Texas said, “We see a lot of growth coming from the East and West Coast. A lot of people moving here from California and New York. We also see a lot of people coming in from the Chicago markets. I think that’s a lot due to the job growth – a lot of opportunity here. The cost of living here is much lower than those areas. Texas is open for business.”

South Carolina, Arizona, Indiana, Colorado, Maine, Idaho and New Mexico make up the remaining top 10 growth states of 2021. Notice the trend. By and large, people are fleeing from liberal strongholds to conservative lands of the free.

The reasons people make the decision to move out of state, of course, are varied and complex. The overall trend, however, is clear. People love freedom and will uproot their lives and move to a new state when that freedom is threatened. It is as simple as that.

https://flagandcross.com/report-u-haul-runs-out-of-moving-trucks-in-california-as-exodus-continues/

*********************************************

Manhattan’s New Soros-Backed DA Orders Armed Robberies to Be Charged as Mere Misdemeanors

Alvin Bragg, the new district attorney of Manhattan, New York, announced his office is downgrading charges for many felonies and will seek prison sentences for only a handful of crimes.

Bragg, a Democrat who was elected in November, outlined his policies in a “Day One Letter” sent to all staff on Monday, saying they were “effective immediately.”

“The Office will not prosecute the following charges, unless as part of an accusatory instrument containing at least one felony count,” the letter read.

The offenses that no longer will be prosecuted include marijuana misdemeanors, prostitution, resisting arrest, fare dodging and trespassing.

Bragg also said his office would “not seek a carceral sentence” except for homicides, violent felonies, domestic violence, some sex offenses, public corruption, rackets and major economic crimes.

“This rule may be excepted only in extraordinary circumstances based on a holistic analysis of the facts, criminal history, victim’s input (particularly in cases of violence or trauma), and any other information available,” the memo read.

The DA instructed prosecutors to “use their judgment and experience to evaluate the person arrested, and identify people: who suffer from mental illness; who are unhoused; who commit crimes of poverty; or who suffer from substance use disorders.”

This order from Bragg comes in spite of the fact that New York City saw a surge in crime last year.

WNYW-TV reported that the overall crime rate in New York City was up 11.2 percent in October compared with 2020.

Particularly, theft and larceny increased throughout the city.

“The number of robberies jumped 15.8% (1,450 v. 1,252) and felonious assaults increased by 13.8% (2,123 v. 1,865) year-over-year,” the outlet reported. “Grand Larceny and auto thefts were also up sharply in October compared to the same period last year. Auto thefts are up almost 15% for the year versus 2020.”

Last month, the New York Police Department reported an even bigger jump in November. “Overall index crime in New York City increased by 21.3% in November 2021, compared with November 2020 (10,186 v. 8,396),” it said.

Overall, the city has seen homicides increase about 50 percent and shootings double since 2019, the Daily Mail reported.

Bragg claimed in his letter that his “policy changes not only will, in and of themselves, make us safer; they also will free up prosecutorial resources to focus on violent crime.”

As a candidate, he was supported by leftist billionaire philanthropist George Soros.

“Mr. Soros also pledged $1 million to the super PAC Color of Change, aimed at helping another district attorney candidate, Alvin Bragg. A spokeswoman for the super PAC said that nearly $500,000 had been spent on Mr. Bragg’s behalf as of Friday,” The New York Times reported last June.

The New York Post reported in December that Soros’ wealth was flowing to candidates through political action committees in an effort to finance a change in criminal justice.

“The goal of the myriad PACs is focused on electing progressives to end tough policing and mass incarceration,” the Post said.

The impact of this effort across the country has not gone unnoticed.

“George Soros has quietly orchestrated the dark money political equivalent of ‘shock and awe,’ on local attorney races through the country, shattering records, flipping races and essentially making a mockery of our entire campaign finance system,” Tom Anderson, director of the Government Integrity Project at the National Legal and Policy Center in Virginia, told the Post.

Now that the Soros-backed Bragg is in office as Manhattan’s DA, many police officers are not happy with the changes he is making to the city’s criminal justice system.

“Bragg gives criminals the roadmap to freedom from prosecution and control of our streets,” Paul DiGiacomo, the head of the NYPD Detectives’ Endowment Association, told the Post.

Patrick Lynch, the president of the Police Benevolent Association, the NYPD’s largest union, also voiced “serious concerns about the message these types of policies send to both police officers and criminals on the street,” the report said.

“Police officers don’t want to be sent out to enforce laws that the district attorneys won’t prosecute,” Lynch said. “And there are already too many people who believe that they can commit crimes, resist arrest, interfere with police officers and face zero consequences.”

The Post also quoted a Manhattan police officer as saying, “This is outrageous. He was elected to enforce the law. If he wanted to change them, he should have run for a state office.”

https://flagandcross.com/manhattans-new-soros-backed-da-orders-armed-robberies-to-be-charged-as-mere-misdemeanors/

**************************************************

Leftist Nutcase Claims 'Trump Was Not Legitimately Elected in 2016'

On Tuesday, "The View" co-host Ana Navarro claimed that former President Donald Trump was not legitimately elected in 2016.

Navarro said, “There’s things which I think should transcend partisanship and should transcend politics, and a breach of the U.S. Capitol, an attack on our democratic principles and institutions should be one of those things. I really blame Republicans at the top for capitulating to Trump. I blame Trump for continuing this environment of lies and conspiracy theories and not accepting that he lost, and encouraging and promoting what happened, the big lie, and what happened on January 6. He bears responsibility. It’s not just me saying this."

She continued, "It was Kevin McCarthy saying this on January 6 — let me read to you what he said, Kevin McCarthy, ‘The president bears responsibility for today’s attacks on Congress by mob rioters.’ McCarthy said on the House floor. ‘He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. These facts require immediate action by President Trump.’ Now just days later, that same Kevin McCarthy was at Mar-a-Lago kissing Trump’s ring.”

Navarro claimed, “We’ve seen Republican after Republican who on January 6 was shocked and calling for an investigation, and for truth and for reaction and action from Trump. We’ve seen them bow down to Trump because they want to stay elected and because they’re putting their own positions over democracy and over defending the U.S. institution of a legitimate election.”

She added, “Look, I felt that Donald Trump had not been legitimately elected. I felt he’d gotten help from the Russians, but you know what? It would have never occurred to me to take up arms against Donald Trump. That’s just not what we do in America. Our weapon of choice is voting, is democracy, it’s the ballot, and so I hope that people remember January 6. You know why? You know how? By registering to vote. By making sure they know where they have to show up to vote because there are elections this year, and they are so crucial.”

https://dailypoliticalnewswire.com/the-views-ana-navarro-claims-trump-was-not-legitimately-elected-in-2016/

*************************************************

Bye bye Massachusetts

Jeff Jacoby

A FRIEND of mine who lived for many years on the North Shore of Massachusetts relocated to Kentucky in 2018 and has rejoiced ever since that it was among the best decisions he ever made. Compared to the Bay State, he reports, the housing where he lives now is more affordable, the taxes are lower, the winters are milder, the people are friendlier, and the politics are more congenial. Not even the tornadoes that tore up western Kentucky last month have dampened his satisfaction in no longer having to put up with all the things that he found so irksome about life in Massachusetts.

My friend's experience isn't anomalous. Each year, more people leave Massachusetts for other states than move to Massachusetts from other states. According to the Census Bureau, between April 2020 and July 2021, the population of Massachusetts shrank by more than 45,000. Only three other, much more populous, states — California, New York, and Illinois — experienced a greater net outflow of residents.

When it comes to domestic migration — the movement of people within the United States — Massachusetts has been on the losing team for quite a while. Back in 2003, the Donahue Institute at the University of Massachusetts noted with concern that over the previous 12 years, Massachusetts had experienced a net loss of more than 213,000 people (not including foreign immigrants). The out-migration hasn't stopped. While the influx of people moving into Massachusetts from elsewhere in the United States has been steady, the Boston Business Journal observed in 2020, the tide of those moving out has swelled by 24 percent. And where are they going? The numbers fluctuate from year to year, but the Journal identified Florida and New Hampshire as the two "top states draining Massachusetts of the most residents."

Real-world evidence confirms that far more people relocate from Massachusetts to Florida or New Hampshire than the other way around.

Consider U-Haul's rental rates. To rent a 26-foot truck for a one-way move from Boston to Orlando this month will cost you $5,325, but the rate is just $887 for a move from Orlando to Boston. Why the steep disparity? Because the demand for one-way trucks from Boston to Florida is very high, while demand for trucks going in the other direction is very low.

The imbalance shows up even for destinations as close as Massachusetts and New Hampshire. U-Haul's rate to rent a truck from Boston to Manchester is $473. But it's just $208 if you're driving from Manchester to Boston.

To be sure, the choices Americans make about where to live and work are affected by all kinds of individual considerations — school, work, weather, family, cost of living. But the persistent attraction of Florida and New Hampshire also reflects the fact that they offer something Massachusetts doesn't: Could it be that neither imposes an income tax? When the states are ranked by overall tax burden, Florida and New Hampshire are among the least onerous. That can't be said about Massachusetts. Taxes are not the only reason that people pull up stakes and move, of course. But the steady (and costly) flow of Massachusetts residents to the Granite and Sunshine states speaks for itself.

Economist Mark Perry, who analyzes national domestic migration patterns, shows that on a range of economic and political measures, the Top 10 "inbound" states (currently Florida, Texas, Arizona, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Idaho, Utah, and Nevada) differ significantly from the Top 10 "outbound" states (California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Louisiana, Maryland, Hawaii, Minnesota, and Michigan). By and large, inbound states have lower taxes, Republican governments, cheaper energy, greater fiscal stability, and a more pro-business environment. Outbound states are more likely to lean the other way.

Admittedly these are only broad patterns, and no state in either category fits the description precisely. And, as noted, every family's decision to move from one state to another is shaped by personal circumstances. But the data keep reinforcing the patterns. "There is empirical evidence that Americans and businesses 'vote with their feet' when they relocate from one state to another," writes Perry. "The evidence suggests that Americans are moving from blue states that are more economically stagnant . . . to fiscally sound red states that are more economically vibrant."

Massachusetts certainly has its charms and advantages; countless Bay Staters would never consider moving anywhere else. But plenty of their neighbors feel differently. Year in, year out, tens of thousands of Massachusetts residents leave for good, and their numbers aren't replenished by newcomers from other states. My friend in Kentucky is happy he left, and he's clearly not alone.

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/25924/bye-bye-bay-state

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

*****************************************