One well-placed Seattle Police source tells “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH that it’s likely true. A second source with knowledge of the situation says he’s out as chief.

If true, the departure comes as Diaz and the department faces a number of complaints and lawsuits alleging sexism, harassment and discrimination. A 27-year-veteran of the department sued Diaz for sex and wage discrimination lawsuit. Four female officers alleged they faced bullying, sexual harassment, and gender discrimination within the department. A third lawsuit claimed retaliation for reporting racial discrimination.

More from Jason Rantz: Officer suing Seattle police for gender discrimination accused of gender bias

Is Adrian Diaz really out as Seattle Police chief?

The source said that Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell “does not like the drama around Diaz.”

“I know this mayor and the mayor’s office. I know the mayor is committed to equity and women having equal wages as men. I think they are very, very concerned about women, generally, and (dislike) the drama. I don’t want it to be the case (that Diaz is fired),” the well-placed Seattle Police Department source.

The claims of drama appear to be part of a coordinated effort by a small group of aggrieved Seattle staffers unhappy with Diaz’s staffing decisions and other policy choices.

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH has not independently confirmed that Diaz will depart from the chief role.

Related: SPD’s assistant chief placed on administrative leave

Listen to “The Jason Rantz Show” on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Bird was awarded a Bronze Star Medal with Valor for “exceptionally valorous conduct in the face of the enemy” on July 9, 2006. He was serving as a Special Forces Engineer during Operation Iraqi Freedom at the time. He was also awarded the Army Commendation Medal for “exceptionally meritorious service” as an Area Support Team Member. Both awards are highlighted on Bird’s campaign website and have been noted in speeches and on social media to bolster his candidacy.

However, documentation obtained exclusively by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH includes a 2009 letter of reprimand against Bird. The letter, signed by then-Brigadier General Hector Pagan, details several instances of misconduct, including that Bird wore awards and badges he did not earn, falsified documents and sought career advancement by deceiving the U.S. Army.

Semi Bird – Military Documents – 0524 by scoogan on Scribd

What did Semi Bird say he did to earn commendation?

Bird was awarded the Bronze Star and a Commendation Medal for heroic work on the battlefield. A narrative accompanying the Bronze Star, obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, said he helped neutralize an ambush attack “with total disregard for his personal safety.”

Additionally, two Green Beret operators who were on the ground on July 9, 2006, including one who he says was responsible for conduct which Bird (and Bird’s major) claimed credit for, spoke exclusively to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, describing Bird as a “fraud.”

Bird has responded to the allegations by asserting they are an attempt “to dishonor a veteran.” He denies any acts of stolen valor, while downplaying the significance of the reprimand.

Why did the U.S. Army reprimand Semi Bird?

As outlined in the reprimand letter, Pagan told Bird the investigation found he “wore awards and badges that you had not earned.” Additionally, Pagan said Bird knowingly “submitted false documents for the sole purpose of gaining an unfair advantage against other individuals” seeking entry into the Warrant Officer Corps. Entry into this program would have afforded Bird a significant increase in pay and responsibilities.

Pagan also discovered Bird “manipulate(d) the system for your personal gain by aiding in the drafting of NCOERs (non-commissioned officer evaluation reports) which you knew to be false” and “enlisted the help of senior NCOs and Officers to perpetuate this fraud against the government.” He said Bird was seeking “personal gain” at the expense of the “good order and discipline of the armed forces.”

“The submission of false information to gain a promotion amounts to fraud against the United States Government,” Pagan wrote.

Pagan began investigating after members of the Special Forces community raised questions about the veracity of many of Bird’s claims. Some heard him claim he was from a unit they knew he was never with. Others said he attended schools that they had been to, but Bird was never able to confirm his attendance.

“Your actions represent a serious departure from the high standards of integrity and professionalism expected of a Special Forces Solider in this Command. Your conduct in this matter causes me to seriously consider your suitability for continued service as a Solider in the United States Army,” Pagan added.

Bird responded to the reprimand within seven days as required, writing that he “first and foremost accept full responsibility for my actions.”

Bird accompanied Green Berets as part of a Tactical Psychological Operation Team on the evening of July 9, 2006. He was in the trail vehicle in the convoy alongside his major.

In the narrative, then-Staff Sergeant Bird is said to have killed an enemy combatant who threatened soldiers with rocket-propelled grenades (RPG). He then helped secure the perimeter around a disabled American military vehicle while still under heavy attack.

The narrative says that at least four enemy personnel engaged the convoy in an ambush, which included two RPGs. Bird exited and “without hesitation, dismounted the vehicle in order to effectively return fire,” according to the narrative.

After reportedly suffering a concussion from the RPG blast approximately twenty feet away, he “immediately regained his composure, got accountability of his security element, and returned fire.” A second RPG reportedly struck Bird “in the helmet with a piece of fragmentation.”

After a third RPG severely wounded an Iraqi Special Operations Force soldier embedded with the Americans, the narrative says Bird “was able to neutralize the threat.”

But, according to operators on the ground during the ambush, Bird did not engage the enemy as the narrative claimed.

Semi Bird accused of stolen valor

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH spoke with two Green Berets who engaged the enemy on July 9, 2006. Both Special Forces operators, requesting anonymity to avoid personal gain from their service, provided a stark contrast to the narrative surrounding the commendation awarded to Bird.

“I shot the guy. I shot the RPG gunner. So, it was a bit of a surprise to me many, many years later to read a copy of the award where apparently that was claimed by Sergeant Bird, or whoever wrote the actual write-up for him,” the Green Beret disclosed.

Amidst the chaos of battle, where “everybody’s firing in all directions,” the Green Beret acknowledged that some details could be mistaken. However, he characterized Bird’s claim as “a stretch,” expressing doubt over whether Bird even exited his vehicle during the engagement.

“Yes, he was firing off if he was outside of his vehicle firing at all, which I have no knowledge of. He surely wasn’t doing any of that in the direction that I was engaged in. He definitely didn’t get the RPG gunner, which was one of the bits of the write-up in the actual award, which again, I didn’t see until years later,” the Green Beret said.

‘There was immediate pushback’ from stolen valor claims against Semi Bird

While recovering from an injury sustained during the battle, the Green Beret heard Bird and his major had “written each other valor awards” for their supposed conduct.

“I got a good laugh at it at the time. That’s just a s*** show. That’s never gonna go anywhere because nobody ever saw them do anything,” he explained. “And then it just kind of disappeared off into the darkness, right? Didn’t hear anything else about it. Didn’t really care. But I was never asked or interviewed about any of the stuff because I’d been medevacked.”

The Green Beret says when Bird and the major’s awards were submitted, “There was immediate pushback in-house.”

He and others didn’t make too big a deal after the initial pushback because, he said, “We were in the middle of a war.”

‘Stolen Valor isn’t just some idiot at the mall wearing a combat award that he didn’t earn’

About five months later, the Green Beret says there was an awards ceremony that honored Bird’s major. He said he remembers Birds’ narrative to closely mirror what was submitted for his major.

He called the ceremony “bittersweet” because he had been jumping through hoops to get two other Special Forces recognized for their valorous conduct. He said he had to repeatedly nominate them before they were finally awarded Bronze Star medals.

“I finally got them approved. And in the same ceremony, there is this field grade who is having a valor award read for his actions during this same deployment. It was comical because of how long it took me to get guys who actually, really deserved something recognized. Two years, submitting over and over again” he said.

The Green Beret said there were other parts of the narrative that he knew other Special Forces were responsible, yet Bird and the major were taking the credit.

“That was probably the most unique and egregious type of aspect of this,” he said. “Stolen valor isn’t just some idiot at the mall wearing a combat award that he didn’t earn or whatever. But somebody who actually took credit for stuff that other people around him did. This is the first time I’ve ever seen or heard of that.”

A second Green Beret backs ‘Stolen Valor’ claims against Semi Bird

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH spoke with a second Green Beret and senior operator who took part in the firefight. He also said Bird was not responsible for what earned him the commendations.

“(The other Green Beret) killed one of the RPG firers. So that part where Misipati (Semi) Bird says that he shot and engaged and neutralized the guy that was shooting RPGs — that’s a blatant lie,” the second Green Beret told “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

He said this RPG enemy was the one directly in front of, and closest to, the truck Bird was in. He does not believe he could have been talking about another enemy fighter.

This second Green Beret also said he did not see Bird exit the disabled vehicle to help get it towed out. According to this Green Beret, who saw the operational summary report, no enemy KIA (“killed in action”) was attributed to Bird.

“(The other Green Beret) facilitated that hookup, not Misipati Bird. Bird didn’t get out of the truck and pull security, all those (are) complete lies,” he said.

He also questioned Bird’s concussion, calling it “an embellishment of bulls***.”

“What I will tell you is that Misipati Bird and this whole process, you know, he used this to gain favor and empower his career after that particular point, all the way up to now, including being the nominee for the Republican Party for the governorship of the state of Washington. And it’s all been built on a fabrication of lies,” he concluded.

‘This is personal. It’s very personal.”

When he saw that Bird and the major were up for a valor award, the second Green Beret says he remembers thinking, “This is such bulls**t.” But he also acknowledges that, at the time, the awards process for Special Forces “was absolutely broken.”

“This is personal. It’s very personal,” he explained. “And I’ll tell you, the biggest regret that I have about my time is not fighting hard enough for my teammates. Because they should have been — each one of them — should have had multiple awards recognizing, (and) acknowledging their valorous activities, the gallantry, that inconspicuous valor that they put their asses in harm’s way for, over and over.”

A fear of his is to see Bird’s stolen valor discredit the Green Berets — the “quiet professionals,” which is how Green Berets prefer to behave — and be used to advance a political career. He hoped  Bird would quietly go away after this news was revealed. He says this is an example of Green Berets trying to police themselves.

But this is not the only claim of “stolen valor” made against Bird.

The ‘scuba’ claim

The second Green Beret said Bird initially submitted a photo to the Army where he was wearing Scuba Diver Insignia on his uniform (it’s commonly referred to as a “scuba bubble”). It is earned after qualifying as a Special Forces combat diver. The Green Beret said Bird falsified this history as well.

When asked about his scuba bubble, the Green Beret said Bird could not recall basic and key facts about the scuba combat diver school in Key West, Florida. He initially told someone he thought the school was in “Key West, California,” according to a third military source.

“It is a very memorable experience. It will be one of the most physically challenging and exhausting activities you will participate in your life,” the Green Beret said.

He said that because Bird couldn’t explain his experiences particularly well, it led to the Pagan investigation. He called Bird “a snake slithering through the National Guard processing system.”

A third military source, who requested anonymity, confirmed this account.

Bird accepted the reprimand’s findings at the time

In a Dec. 9, 2010 memorandum in response to the letter of reprimand, obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, Bird wrote, “I first and foremost accept full responsibility for my actions.” Bird incorrectly dated the letter 2010 instead of 2009.

“The intent of this memorandum is to acknowledge the fact that I submitted false and inaccurate information in my Warrant Officer (WO) packet to include false NCOER’s in order to compensate for unrated time and meet the requirements for the WO program. My actions constitute nothing less than a fraud against the United States Army plain and simple,” Bird wrote.

He admitted that he “took advantage of the senior NCO’s and Officers in my chain of command” by betraying their trust and offered that “this incident has served as a wakeup call for me as a senior NCO.” He said he has submitted new forms, corrected records, and offered a new official photo “to correct the wrong I have perpetrated against the United States Army.”

Prior to this reprimand, Bird had been court-martialed for assaulting a sergeant while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. He said it was the result of the sergeant using a racial slur against him.

Bird pushes back on stolen valor concerns

Bird defended his record during a 67-minute phone interview May 24. He lamented that “it’s amazing how on Memorial Day we lost ourselves once again to try to discredit a veteran” and called the claims made against him “evil.”

The gubernatorial hopeful flatly denied taking credit for the actions of others. He pointed to documentation from the award narrative and his major’s witness account as proof.

Bird also alleged that, at the time, a senior noncommissioned officer from his unit “had a problem with me” and had been out to get him. He would not name the individual.

“This individual went so far as to a Judge Advocate General telling him, ‘If you continue to push this, we will file charges on you. I don’t know why you’re going after Bird so hard. But if you continue to do this, we will file charges on you. We verified his stuff. Why are you doing this?'” Bird recalled.

What “awards and badges” did Bird wear that he didn’t earn?

Bird also addressed the reprimand finding that he wore awards and badges that he did not earn.

Initially, Bird said he could only think of the scuba bubble badge. He denied telling anyone he said he trained in Key West and this resulted from a paperwork problem that prevented him from verifying that he attended training school.

Bird said there was an allegation made about an Aviator Badge he was wearing from his time as a flight medic. But he said that the National Guard “verified all of my awards and medals” when they “scrubbed” through his personnel form and the Aviator Badge “was verified.”

“That was it. So, when they (Pagan) say ‘awards and badges,’ that’s the terminology,” he said.

But that doesn’t appear to be the case.

Washington Republican gubernatorial candidate Semi Bird has addressed the reprimand finding that he wore awards and badges that he did not earn. (Photos obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH)

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH obtained two official Army photos: one taken before the reprimand, and one after. According to an independent third party expert who reviewed the photos for this story, between the photos, Bird appears to have removed the German Jump Wings, an oak leaf cluster on his Army Commendation Medal, and a star device on his National Defense Service Medal, in addition to the Special Forces Combat Divers Badge.

Promises of access to files were unfulfilled

Bird explained that he had documents on his computer in a folder titled “Slander” that would dispute claims made against him. During the interview, he promised to provide them to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

“I’m gonna give you everything, OK? I’m gonna give you so much more. Because at this point in time, I am sitting here with my wife … we signed up to try to do something good for our state … this is going to be good because I want everyone to know …,” he explained.

Hours after the call, attorney Matthew Taylor with Boise-based Taylor Law Offices emailed “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH. He said he would assist Bird in providing “additional answers or comments regarding your discussion about his military history” and that future requests should go through him, to be taken “under consideration.”

Initially, Taylor did not respond to multiple emails asking for the files and for clarification on what awards and badges were referenced in the reprimand to put better context to the photos. We had set a noon deadline for receiving these files. However, at 3:54 p.m. on Tuesday, May 28, Bird representatives contacted “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH requesting a meeting the following day, Wednesday, May 29. But he did not provide the promised documents. After careful consideration, we have decided to publish the story at 5 p.m. on May 28. Any new information or context provided by Bird’s representatives will be included in future updates.

Bird claimed confusion over the reprimand

When first asked about the reprimand, Bird went into detail about a rule violation, explaining what, why, and how everything happened. He said the reprimand was not supposed to be public, claiming it was “a reprimand that … happens all the time in the military. And my reprimand, again, was supposed to be buried.”

But he was talking about a separate incident unrelated to the Pagan reprimand.

Bird said he falsely attested on an evaluation sheet for a soldier in his unit, to help that soldier advance in his training. This incident had not been previously reported.

Bird explained that he merely confused this new incident with what Pagan found because this happened so long ago. He then said this incident didn’t lead to a reprimand. But he also claimed it was “the only reprimand I ever had” and claimed this incident “was supposed to be sealed.” This leaves an open question as to whether or not Bird actually did face a second reprimand tied to the incident he revealed.

“This is a duress moment for me. And I’m not trying to make excuses for it. I’m just being very, blatantly honest with you. There is truth in what I’m saying. But there’s a lot of confusion because I don’t recollect much of what you’re saying. I do recollect that firefight,” Bird said.

Former JAG breaks down the severity of Semi Bird stolen valor claims

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH shared the DOD documents and Bird interview with attorney Jeffrey Lustick for his review and expertise.

Lustick served in the U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps and was the director of Military Justice for the 1st Special Operation Wing and the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command. He’s also a former Washington Air National Guard member and currently has a civilian legal practice with offices in Bellingham and Las Vegas.

“When you wear a badge, a ribbon, or medal on your uniform, and it’s something that you did not earn, it is potentially a criminal offense under Article 106(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and could result in brig (jail) time, (rank) reduction to Private, forfeitures of pay, and a bad conduct discharge,” Lustick explained to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

It’s also a crime under the UCMJ to make a false official statement under Article 107. Lustick says it has a maximum punishment of five years in prison, a reduction to E-1, and a possible dishonorable discharge.

Lustick explained that, “this can also be termed ‘stolen valor’ under civilian law and military law, and it’s a complete slap in the face when valor is stolen by a military member.”

In 2005, Congress passed the Stolen Valor Act to prohibit falsely representing oneself as having been awarded any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the Armed Forces or any service medals or badges. However, in 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional. In response, Congress enacted a more limited version of the Stolen Valor Act in 2013. This revised act makes it illegal to falsely claim to have earned the top four valor awards, the Purple Heart, or combat-related qualification badges for financial gain or any tangible benefit.

Is this stolen valor under the law?

When asked if Bird’s case was one of stolen valor, Lustick said “it depends.”

“If his German Jump Wings and the ‘scuba bubble badge’ and a cluster on his ribbon rack are all fake, it’s probably a minor case, except it’s even more aggravated when done by a Special Operations soldier who tells lies like this and get others involved in telling the lies,” he said.

If Bird’s Bronze Star with Valor device wasn’t actually earned, then Lustick calls it “a clear case of stolen valor and it’s no wonder why members of Bird’s Green Beret Team are still talking about this several years later. It’s not an axe to grind. It would be about trying to get Bird to stop stretching the truth.”

“There is a professional culture within the Special Operations Community, which is made up of Army Green Berets and Rangers, Navy Seals, Marine Raiders, Air Force Pararescue and Combat Controllers, and other not so publicly well known operators,” Lustick explained. “They describe themselves as being ‘silent professionals’ who often shrug off individual accomplishments as a simple fulfillment of their difficult duties. This is their personal ethos that they live by all throughout their careers.”

Why did this only earn a reprimand?

After reading the General Officer Letter of Reprimand given to Bird for the 2009 incident, Lustick said that was “surprised that he being such a senior NCO with 17 years of experience, that it didn’t result in at least non-judicial punishment, which is when a commanding officer calls out the misconduct and the soldier agrees to accept punishment.”

Lustick speculates Bird only faced a letter of reprimand because there’s “a gray area” involving members of the Army National Guard regarding whether they serve in a federal or state status.

“But National Guardsmen also serve sometimes in positions with the Department of the Army or the Department of the Air Force, where they change status day by day. They become federalized for special duties or when receiving federal training and then revert back to state status,” Lustick noted.

The ‘gray area’ explained

When a National Guard member is not in a federal status, they do not automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ.

“A senior NCO who is a Special Operator and who wears badges and ribbons he didn’t earn to embellish his record is not tolerated within the SOF community. Plus, as the letter of reprimand also says, this NCO got others to help him carry out the fraud submit a fraudulent special selection application. That’s almost always going to result in a court-martial if the person doing it is on active duty in a federal status.” Lustick explained.

It is unclear if Bird was on federal orders and, therefore, in a federal status when he received the Letter or Reprimand. If Bird had been in the National Guard in Washington at the time, then jurisdiction would have fallen to the Washington State Adjutant General, who at the time was Air Force Lt. General Frank Scoggins.

A group of people in attendance at the Washington State Republican Party 2024 Convention hold up signs supporting Semi Bird as the gubernatorial candidate they wish to endorse. (Photo provided by the Semi Bird for Governor campaign)

Lustick was one of a few military prosecutors for the Washington Guard until late 2008 and says, “Bird’s name never came up. When the SOCSOUTH JAGs handled this, they apparently never reported what had happened to us.”

Political implications with Semi Bird stolen valor claims and official reprimand

Bird, a former Richland School Board Director, earned the Washington State Republican endorsement after a somewhat contentious party convention in April.

Delegates endorsed Bird over his Republican opponent, former King County Sheriff and U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert. It was an early endorsement for the party, intended to help keep Republicans focused on backing the candidate with the best chance of winning in the general.

The endorsement vote was initially called off at the convention. Party leadership said Bird “was not forthcoming” during the vetting process. It was a reference to a 1993 conviction on a federal misdemeanor charge of bank larceny. The Seattle Times reported it was connected to falsifying a credit application “with intent to steal and purloin” funds from U.S. Bank. Bird used the name and social security number of his father on the application. He said he takes full responsibility for the incident.

Delegates overturned the decision to nix the endorsement and voted to back Bird.

Will a reprimand and claims of stolen valor end the Semi Bird campaign?

It’s hard to imagine that stolen valor claims, and an admission of falsifying records to defraud the Army, won’t leave even the Semi Bird campaign supporters with questions about his conduct.

For Lustick, the letter of reprimand and Bird’s response make it clear: he can’t be trusted.

“I think it calls into question a lot of claims that he’s made about his military service. I think it calls into question about his ability to be truthful and honest. And this is not the type of person that you should trust moving forward,” Lustick said. “Because if you will put yourself in front of soldiers who have died, who have been permanently injured, who have given their lives for military service, and you’re trying to claim that you did the same thing when in reality you didn’t, that is despicable, and certainly should not be something that we overlook.”

But Bird contends he will not allow this “slander” to stop him his gubernatorial campaign.

“But here’s what’s not going to happen. I’m not going to quit. I’m not getting off the ballot. They’ve already tried to character assassinate me. So now, here’s this,” Bird said to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

Listen to “The Jason Rantz Show” on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Despite being a deep blue state, Biden only has 42% support (31% certain, 11% inclined to support the president but could change their minds). Trump has 34% support (25% certain, 9% inclined to support the former president but could change their minds). With media coverage so positively skewed towards Biden and against Trump, both poll results are surprising for Washington voters.

With 13% of Washington state voters undecided, Trump theoretically has a shot at taking the state. Helping his cause are the third-party candidates Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jill Stein and Cornell West, which earn 6% amongst them.

Even with favorable polling, a Trump win in Washington is still unlikely. However, the poll portends Biden and Democrat troubles this election season. 

More from Jason Rantz: Exclusive – Secretary of State says AG Bob Ferguson demanded he break law in vulgar tirade

What do Washington state voters care about the most?

The Cascade PBS/Elway poll offers plenty of warning signs for Democrats. 

Nearly 80% of respondents pay attention to government and politics (44% say regularly follow and 32% say they pay attention most of the week, but not every day). Yet only 35% believe this is the “most important election of my lifetime,” which suggests that Democrats’ insistence that abortion access and democracy itself is on the ballot is being dismissed.

According to the poll, the most important issue on the minds of voters is the economy (28%) and immigration (a soft 18%). Only 14% are motivated by Democracy at risk and 11% by the Biden vs. Trump rematch, again signaling the main Democrat talking point about the dangers of Trump is falling flat.

Only 7% of respondents cited foreign affairs as important (and only 2% listed Israel’s war against Hamas). But in a tight race, this could matter. Young voters who have ideologically aligned with anti-Israel extremists and Hamas terrorists may back a third-party candidate over Biden or not be motivated to vote at all.

While the poll framed voter issues through the presidential election, it’s hard to imagine Washington Democrats escaping the blame and Republicans earning some support. 

In poll, economy and illegal immigration hurt Democrats, but help Trump, Republicans in Washington

Criticisms of either the economy or illegal immigration lay at the feet of Democrats, who have complete control in Olympia, and Biden, whose administration has dictated policy direction. Both issues have consistently polled well for Trump and Republicans nationally.

Washington’s economy has been struggling thanks to job losses hitting tech and construction the highest.

At 4.8% in April, the state’s unemployment rate is at its highest since September 2021, post-COVID (4.7%), and is nearly a point higher than the national average (3.9%). 

The impacts of illegal immigration have also caught Washingtonian’s attention. 

With an influx of migrants seeking asylum in the Seattle area, holding parks hostage until they’re given housing, area residents have grown annoyed and concerned. Meanwhile, high-profile crimes allegedly committed by illegal immigrants, including the death of Washington State Patrol Trooper Christopher Gadd highlight the crisis.

More from Jason Rantz: Bob Ferguson using ‘fake’ name in his run for Governor, misstated law to threaten opponent

The impact of initiatives

A trio of popular, voter-backed initiatives are on the ballot, bringing more enthusiasm to the election.

If approved, I-2117 (41% support vs. 31% opposed) would nix the burdensome and costly gas tax from Governor Jay Inslee’s signature cap and trade program. I-2019 ends the state’s new capital gains tax (47% vs. 36%). I-2124 ends the state’s lackluster long-term care insurance mandate (47% vs. 25%). While the three initiatives still have high undecided voters, it’s in good shape, especially since big money hasn’t dropped to promote them yet. 

The three initiatives, if approved, would reverse Democrats’ main policy agendas from the last two legislative sessions. Three other initiatives, all killing Democrat policies like the ban of police vehicular pursuits, were already reversed by the state legislature under pressure from the public and positive polling in their favor.

More from Jason Rantz: Progressive candidate upset he isn’t running unopposed, makes up candidate

Bob Ferguson is in trouble, Dave Reichert angling for an upset

If fewer voters are excited about the presidential election, with Biden voters clearly less enthusiastic than Trump supporters, it’s easy to see how Democrats can suffer across the ticket.

Despite statewide name recognition (or perhaps because of it), Attorney General Bob Ferguson only secures 33% of the respondent’s certain or likely support. His main Republican challenger, former congressman and King County Sheriff Dave Reichert pulls in 28%, and he’s not particularly well-known on the east side of the state. 

Ferguson has struggled early in the campaign due to far-left views behind Washingtonian’s concerns with the state’s direction.

Ferguson pushed for drug decriminalization, which has been responsible for the state’s record high fatal overdoses and the related homelessness and crime crises. He may be trying to rewrite history now, but usually, politicians have more respect for voters than to do it this close to his previous publicly-held positions. 

Poll doesn’t look good for Maria Cantwell, Dr. Raul Garcia holds steady

Incumbent Senator Maria Cantwell only pulls in 39% support, despite being in office since 2000. But most voters can’t name a single issue to define Cantwell’s career and she’s been almost entirely absent from the state except for when she runs for re-election. She does so few media appearances and speeches that she’s easily forgettable.

Dr. Raul Garcia, her Republican challenger and a relative newcomer, pulls in 30% of the vote.

Focused on the economy, public safety (particularly around drug addiction), and his personal story of he and his mother escaping Fidel Castro’s communist regime to become refugees benefiting from gaining asylum in the United States, Garcia’s campaign has been gaining traction.

With 30% of the voters still undecided, the Senate race is up for grabs.

Washington is still a blue state, despite positive-looking poll for Trump

There is no doubt that Washington is still a deeply blue state and Democrats will start to coalesce closer to November, despite the poll showing better than expected (and potential) support for Trump. But the polling is unusually soft for Democrat candidates and their issues and it’s unclear how many Democrat voters will vote third party or sit this election out. Why is that?

When one party has total control of the state legislature and most of the city’s largest and mid-size cities, voters can better understand who is to blame for their worries. Democrats branded themselves around defunding police, legalizing drugs, targeting businesses and shutting down our economy during COVID. Residents are not pleased.

Biden is deeply unpopular with even diehard anti-Trumpers conceding their lives were better under the former president. Plus, there’s a looming threat of third-party candidates who can pick up younger, activist voters who otherwise would be knocking on doors for the Democrat nominee. If they sit the activism out this time around, it will undoubtedly hurt Democrats.

This is a recipe for upsets in 2024.

Trump can take advantage, not necessarily by winning (though it’s possible, even if improbable), but by motivating unlikely voters to mail in their ballot — supporting the initiatives and down ticket Republican candidates. It’s also easy to see how Trump haters could skip voting “MAGA” for president, but understand we’re feeling the pains of one-party rule, choosing to vote for Reichert or Garcia, and giving Republicans a chance.

Listen to the Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

The group of staff explained their walkout in a social media post, complaining that the exhibit “Confronting Hate Together” calls out antisemites who hide behind “anti-Zionism” to justify their hate.

Ironically, the staff did exactly what the exhibit condemns, even accusing Jews of engaging in white supremacy, despite Jews not being white.

“On university campuses, pro-Palestinian groups have voiced support for Hamas (which is classified as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government) and a Palestinian state stretching ‘from the river to the sea,’ a phrase defined by the erasure of Israel,” says a passage at the exhibit the antisemites dislike.

More from Jason Rantz: UW Seattle embraced the Nazi Youth as a new generation of hate group has formed

Antisemitic staff walkout over antisemitism exhibit at Seattle museum

The antisemitic staffers claimed they raised concerns about this exhibit in May. Online, they accuse Israel of “violent colonization and imperialism” and declare, “Zionism has no place in our communities.” Translation: “Jews have no place in our communities.”

“We love the Wing Luke Museum and are consistently honored to steward the stories of our community members, many of whom have experienced the destructive harm of white supremacy, genocide and violence that parallels the experience of Palestinians today,” the group posted in a statement. “Our solidarity with Palestine should be reflected in our AA/NHPI institutions. It sets a dangerous precedent of platforming colonial, white supremacist perspectives and goes against the Museum’s mission as a community-based museum advancing racial and social equity.”

They don’t explain which “white supremacist perspectives” were platformed, though they believe Jews are white, so any pro-Israel platform is white supremacist to them. They whine about “Zionist language” in the exhibit. Zionism is the belief that Jews should live on our ancestral land, Israel. Anti-Zionists don’t believe Israel should exist, an antisemitic position.

The group closed comments on its Instagram page to avoid criticism. Like in Gaza with Hamas in charge, you do not question the Jew-haters who declared themselves in charge.

Cowardly museum leadership bows to antisemitism

The antisemitic staffers have demands before they return to work.

Rather than sugarcoat their demands, “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH will translate them: they want language critical of “Palestinian liberation” (including Hamas terrorism) and supportive of Zionism removed; an acknowledgment that the section on antisemitism doesn’t include voices of antisemites justifying terrorism against Israel; a community panel with antisemites to review and edit the exhibit; and more antisemitic voices posturing as pro-Palestinian and anti-racist.

The cowards running the Wing Luke Museum have made some changes due to criticism from their antisemitic staff. But that wasn’t enough. Steve McLean, director of communications for the museum, told the Seattle Times, “Certainly adding voices that may even stand in contrast to some of the voices used in this exhibit, that would be something we are interested in pursuing.”

If the museum adds voices that “stand in contrast” to those featured in the exhibit, it no longer confronts hate. It perpetuates it.

Local media’s pathetic whitewashing of antisemitism

Local media coverage has been predictably pathetic in its whitewashing of the staff hatred.

The Seattle Times offered a story intended to normalize and amplify the hate, even attempting to defend the use of the phrase “from the river to the sea.” KING 5, which has platformed anti-Israel and antisemitic voices since October 7, offered a bare-bones explanation of the protest without any voices condemning the hate.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Ferguson was upset when two other people with the exact same name legally filed to run for governor. One Ferguson is from Yakima, and the other from Graham. Both insist they were running because they think they’d be better than the Attorney General at running the state.

“It was so stressful with the three Bobs and (Attorney General) Bob Ferguson yelling at me. Oh man, I was so mad,” Hobbs said. “It’s like, I just took it because it’s like, I get it, he’s upset.”

But then Hobbs said he was asked to break the law.

“And then he wanted me to reorder the ballot. I was like, ‘I can’t do it,'” Hobbs said.

The secretary of state said Ferguson responded: “Bull***t! You could push the envelope!”

“No, actually, I can’t do that,” Hobbs said he told Ferguson.

Hobbs’ retelling of the phone call was caught on an open mic. “The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH” has reviewed the audio and Hobbs, through a spokesperson, did not deny the veracity of the quotes.

UPDATE (5/23/24, 10:40 a.m.): On May 23, a spokesperson indicated he did not agree with my characterization that he did not deny the veracity of the quotes, arguing I didn’t offer the full exchange. I then provided the quotes outlined above – three times – and asked if he denied them. He again did not deny their veracity.

More from Jason Rantz: Bob Ferguson using ‘fake’ name in his run for Governor, misstated law to threaten opponent

Why did Bob Ferguson think he could get the Secretary of State to break the law?

Under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 29A.36.131, the order of candidates appearing on the ballot is determined randomly. The Attorney General Bob Ferguson was not slated to appear first. Concurrently, Ferguson threatened the two other Fergusons, saying if they didn’t drop out of the race, they would face jail time.

The Ferguson campaign, in a statement to the Washington Standard, claimed that Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 434-215-060 allows Hobbs to rearrange the ballot if it would address potential voter confusion. Ferguson claims he would have sued to rearrange the ballot order and that “a judge in Thurston County” would agree with him. He didn’t name the judge.

But Ferguson is wrong on the law, a troubling fact given he’s the Washington state Attorney General. His attorney also made this demand in a letter to Hobbs.

Washington RCW always supersedes the WAC. Hobbs, sniping at Ferguson in an interview with the Washington State Standard, said that “It doesn’t take a first-year law student to know that.”

Consistent with the law, Hobbs reached out to the Ferguson candidates to explain that he would list their occupations next to their names on the ballot in order to mitigate any voter confusion.

More from Jason Rantz: Drama! Governor Jay Inslee slams Bob Ferguson’s ‘brain dead’ ferry plan

Attorney General Bob Ferguson went too far

Ferguson’s angry response to the situation is understandable. But his aggression and willful disregard for the law, insisting a state agency knowingly violate the law, is a step too far. His Democrat opponent, State Senator Mark Mullet, said this incident revealed the Attorney General’s true character.

“I thought the two ‘fake’ Bobs should have withdrawn. I’m glad they did withdraw. I think anything that’s confusing voters isn’t helping in the process. And to me, that was really important. But I was also shocked. I mean, shocked that our Attorney General basically emailed and instructed the Secretary of State to break the law to rearrange the ballot because the law is very clear that the Secretary of State should have listed their professions had the other Bobs not withdrawn,” Mullet told “The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH.”

Mullet, a moderate and pro-business and law enforcement Democrat alternative to Ferguson, argued that “asking somebody to break the law for your political advantage was pretty aggressive.”

“But to me, this highlights Bob Ferguson’s character, which is he’s going to do whatever is best for him to get elected,” Mullet said. “And that’s going to be his number one compass. And I think it does speak to his character. And I think it is important for voters to understand that’s how he’s going to operate because he’s already operating that way in trying to get into the office. It’ll just be more of the same that he’s actually in the office. And I think we need to have someone in the governor’s office whose focus isn’t on getting reelected, but is focused on doing what is right. Clearly, it wasn’t right to ask the Secretary of State to rearrange the ballot.”

‘This guy has a long history of doing things like this to people’

Conservative activist Glen Morgan helped the two other Fergusons navigate the filing process to run for governor. He also condemned Ferguson’s unprofessional behavior.

Ferguson argued that the “immediate knee-jerk reaction” of threatening jail time is indicative of a power-hungry politician willing to do anything to get into power. And, he claimed, this is a trend with Ferguson.

“This guy has a long history of doing things like this to people, whether it’s small restaurant owners, or flower shops, or you know, anything else, state workers, state ferry workers. This abusive default, to attack people, particularly people who don’t have the resources to defend themselves. That’s who you’re looking at as the guy running for governor right now. The worst possible tendency of anybody running for office is somebody who has a desire to abuse their position to attack their political enemies, and people who they think are too small, or they don’t have the power to fight back. And that’s exactly what’s been illustrated and exposed in this case.”

Ferguson did not respond to a request for comment.

Listen to the Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

The recently revealed lineup is an embarrassment of deficiency; a mirror image of a struggling Seattle.

The struggling summer festival revealed its 2024 lineup and it’s hard to understand what they’re trying to do. Festival organizers managed to find one of the least impressive and most forgettable rock bands of the mid-’90s, Pavement, to be the main headliner. The rest of the lineup is, obviously, no better.

Rounding out the supposedly top tier talent? Cypress Hill (amusing rap group you forgot existed), James Blake (the guy who performed that one song that you can’t remember but you kind of remember his name), Marc Rebillet (who?), and Courtney Barnett (also, who?).

What happened to Bumbershoot Seattle lineup?

Once the pride of Seattle, Bumbershoot has struggled with mismanagement, exorbitant costs, and a devastating pandemic hiatus. Attempts at revival—like slashing ticket prices and reducing event days—have failed miserably.

AEG took over from One Reel, providing big names but was ultimately too costly for average fans to attend. Coupled with mismanagement and sky-high high production costs, it could not survive the COVID-19 pandemic, even if it was a mostly outdoor festival.

Ultimately, Bumbershoot took a three year hiatus only to return in 2023 with cheaper ticket prices, one fewer day, and little fan interest in headliners Sleater-Kinney, Fatboy Slim, and the Dandy Warhols. The hiatus should have been permanent.

More from Jason Rantz: Progressive candidate upset he isn’t running unopposed, makes up candidate

It’s time to let this music festival come to an end

There’s nothing redeeming about the 2024 lineup. The $70 single day pass, which is even lower than 2023’s discount, still seems too high based on the lineup.

I understand that insufferable elitist music critics may enjoy the lineup. Michael Rietmulder from The Seattle Times even called it a “knockout.” People like this revel in claiming to appreciate things most people don’t, thinking it makes them seem evolved and cultured. It doesn’t. They’re just blowhards.

The glory days of Bumbershoot was when you’d pay whatever the price happened to be for a single day because you’d spend that much on one or two of the headliners alone (Bob Dylan, Mary J. Blige, Weezer, Hole, Ellie Goulding).

Bumbershoot was worth it even if you were forced to suffer through crummy, subpar acoustics of the then-Key Arena because you got to see M83 or Heart.

And rather than focus exclusively on local bands with no shot of ever growing but were cheap enough to book so you can say you have local flair, there was more booking discernment (Secret Weapons, Watsky, Børns, Saint Claire, and Noah Gunderson).

It’s okay to let traditions go. Some need to die. Bumbershoot 2024 is a disservice to its legacy. It’s time to let this once-great festival rest in peace. At this point, it’s cruel to watch it painfully become so irrelevant.

More from Jason Rantz: UW Seattle activists say their First Amendment rights threatened by speaker they don’t like

Listen to the Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

“We are totally new here in the country,” Daniel Vingo exclusively told “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, explaining that many migrants seeking asylum neither understand why they’re protesting, nor the legal repercussions of doing so.

“I’m saying as an asylum seeker, you must know that we don’t know much here, how things work here, so I can’t go somewhere to protest, protest, protest. Before the protest, I must know my rights,” Vingo continued.

While Vingo said he wasn’t judging the organizations, and that he’s grateful for help and support, he believes they must do a better job explaining to the asylum seekers what they’re doing and why.

More from Jason Rantz: Washington Dems diverted $460M to illegal immigrants into 2023

Why does asylum seeker believe activists are taking advantage of them?

After funding ran out to house hundreds of migrants at a hotel in Kent, Seattle-area housing activists transported them to a Seattle park declaring they would not leave until they received more funding. This was the second stunt organized by activists on behalf of the migrants. Many of the activists keep their identity private, covering their faces during the stunts so they’re not recorded on video by local media outlets.

Vingo worries that many of the migrants “don’t know better” and simply agree to comply with activist plans.

“I have friends who are participating in those protests. And when I ask them, ‘Why are you going?’ they say, ‘We are just protesting because they (activists) say we must go.’ Okay, I’m not judging that,” Vingo said, adding that he’s worried someone could be deported for violating the law during one of the protests.

While Vingo said that everyone has a right to protest, he thinks activist organizers “must explain to people what they are doing because we are asylum seekers. We cannot just go and do some stuff like that. I’m afraid because it can affect my status here.” He said he doesn’t personally feel taken advantage of because he understands the process.

The latest park occupation was mostly successful. Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell agreed to fund the migrants’ hotel stay in Kent through June 30, despite previously saying the funds have run out. This likely means activists will convince vulnerable migrants to illegally occupy another park on July 1.

Why are migrants coming to the Seattle area?

Vingo is one of the hundreds of local migrants seeking asylum and he likely qualifies. He said he fled to the United States from the region of Cabinda, where his freedoms were at risk because of his political activism calling for independence from Angola. Political persecution is a qualifying determination for asylum seekers.

The political activist crossed the border between Mexico and California, leaving his family behind in Cabinda as they’ve not been subject to the consequences of his own activism. He said he spent only two days in detention and was released without turning over much information, including why he was crossing illegally. He said they just asked for basic biographical information, like his name and signed paperwork acknowledging the asylum-seeking process.

“For me, it was a surprise, not asking me questions,” Vingo said, noting he did eventually provide this information post-detention.

Vingo, like many others, made his way to Tukwila because he heard, via a friend, that the Riverton Park United Methodist Church was housing and assisting asylum seekers. Both King County and the state of Washington offer protections to people in this country illegally, regardless of whether or not they have legitimate claims of asylum.

More from Jason Rantz: Coming Clean About Illegal Immigration

Listen to the Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and  Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

The Nazi label is not hyperbolic; it is a sobering reflection of how history will repeat itself when hate is allowed to flourish unchecked. And at the UW and other campuses, hate is flourishing. The students’ single-minded fanaticism and refusal to engage with differing viewpoints mirror the indoctrination of the Nazi Youth, who were trained to follow a destructive ideology without question. It explains why you have imbeciles carrying “Gays for Palestine” signs. Today’s Nazis are ensnared in an echo chamber, where any dissenting opinion is met with hostility or outright violence.

This new generation of Nazi activists employs a dangerous combination of hateful rhetoric, intimidation, violence and fringe ideological purity reminiscent of the darkest chapters of history. Ironically, the threat comes from the very activists who claimed they were fighting a “literal fascist” in former president Donald Trump. But this rise of a new Nazi Youth is deeply alarming, especially for Jewish Seattleites and UW students.

Just because they’re not currently rounding up Jews for slaughter doesn’t mean they get to escape the moniker of Nazi. I can’t think of anything positive that can come from a group cheerleading Hamas.

More from Jason Rantz: UW Seattle gave barriers to Antifa to keep Jews out of Liberated Zone

Shouldn’t we call these UW student activists what they are? They’re a new generation of Nazi Youth

The demonization of an entire country of people is strikingly similar to the propaganda used by the original Nazis.

UW campus activists commonly crossed the line from what they pretend is “criticizing Israeli policies” to outright violent antisemitism. Their chants always include language that call for the end of Israel. “We don’t want two-state, we want 1948” and “from the river to the Sea, Palestine will be free” are unambiguous despite phony protestations otherwise. Maybe Seattle media members can follow up with a clarifying question or two? Perhaps they can find out if calling for a “global intifada” isn’t about violence against Israel, then what is it about?

Jews or Zionists, the codeword Nazi Youth use to avoid being explicitly antisemitic, are regularly demonized and dehumanized as genocidal baby killers and colonizers. Meanwhile, terrorists with Hamas are labeled “freedom fighters” and the “resistance.” That Hamas murdered actual babies, raped women, murdered innocent civilians and took scores of hostages doesn’t seem to matter to these new Nazis. They either ignore the inconvenient truth about the terrorists they’re rooting for, or they pretend it’s part of a Jewish media lie.

Rantz exclusive: UW professor assaulted at autonomous Liberated Zone as admin keeps cops away

Assault and vandalism at UW is driven by a hatred of Jews

The intimidation tactics employed by these students, staff, and outside agitators also draw a direct line to the UW Nazi Youth.

Just as the Nazi Youth were trained to suppress dissent violently, today’s UW Nazis sought to silence any opposition through aggressive disruption or stalking and assaulting. Jewish UW students reported feeling unsafe, not just because of the content of the protests, but because of the hostile environment created around them. But Cauce did nothing. She didn’t want to upset the Nazis, even though it would inevitably escalate.

And that’s what happened last week when UW Nazis vandalized the campus en masse. One of the messages? “Save a life. Kill your local colonizer.” The messages were so vile, even Cauce was finally forced into calling it antisemitic. But that’s all she did to condemn the UW Nazi Youth.

Rather than clear the UW Liberated Zone encampment, she again politely asked the Nazis to leave voluntarily. In Seattle, we don’t call police on Nazis. We just label police the Nazis and then wonder why no one wants to be a cop here.

Negotiating with UW Nazi Youth

We do, apparently, negotiate with Nazis. At least college presidents do.

Cauce’s recent decision to come to an agreement with activists occupying the quad is a particularly shameful episode in this saga. But given her track record and far-left views, we shouldn’t be shocked.

Rather than standing firm against the tactics of intimidation, Cauce chose to appease the protesters, effectively endorsing their hateful rhetoric. This capitulation undermines the university’s claim to being a place of learning and open debate. It sends a scary message that bullying and occupation are effective strategies to achieve political ends.

Cauce came to an agreement with the Nazi Youth so that they would agree to end the encampment. The United Front for Palestinian Liberation, a local chapter of a hate club of privileged college kids unhappy with their barista gigs and in search of meaning, earned five concessions from Cauce and the UW.

One of the concessions is that the UW will review changes to its study abroad program so that the college cuts ties with Israel. The Nazi Youth claim the new programs will “exclude participation from students from specific countries or communities, including Palestinian or other Arab students.” They think this covers Israel, though it doesn’t. Calling a country an “apartheid state” doesn’t mean it is one. But “apartheid” may be one of the words the Radical Left has redefined — like “woman.”

Another concession: UW waive tuition for at least 20 displaced Palestinian students from Gaza. This will definitely end well.

Thankfully, sometimes antisemitism is boring

Of course, the Nazi Youth aren’t happy with the concessions. United Front students released a press statement to say they “are under no illusions that this agreement is a win.”

“Many of our demands remain unfulfilled as the UW has shown clear reluctance to make even the smallest progress towards reducing our complicity in the ongoing genocide in Palestine,” according to the statement. In other words, they got a bit bored and didn’t want to keep pretending they were living in the encampment, especially since so many unvetted, creepy adults in the greater new Nazi movement moved in.

The activists claimed that they would never leave until there was a “Free Palestine.” But do you know how tiresome and expensive it was to drive to their parents’ homes in Kirkland, Edmonds and Sammamish after their Jew-hating meet-up sessions at the encampment? They never lived there. Many of the tents were empty; it was a part of their performative political expression. The only camping most of the student activists would do is glamping.

More from Jason Rantz: Seattle homeless man groped himself by ‘Free Gaza’ hacked sign

Are all these Nazis fueled by hate?

While there’s undoubtedly pure antisemitism within the movement of the new generation of Nazi, they’re not all driven by hate. Many of them just have no clue what they’re talking about, taken advantage of by bigots.

It’s hard to not consider some of the Nazi Youth activists victims of their own ignorance. Do you think they can define apartheid and then apply it to Israel? Can they explain what a genocide actually is? Could they truly defend their support of Hamas? Of course not.

It’s Gaza that is unwelcome to Jews, not Israel unwelcome to Palestinians. If Israel wanted to commit a “genocide,” they’d probably be less targeted in their strikes and they probably wouldn’t warn civilians of their military targets. Us Jews are usually pretty efficient; this would be uncharacteristically inefficient of us. And no, they have no good answer for why they support Hamas rapists and bigots who throw LGBT people from rooftops.

These activists don’t even have real Jews in their lives. Their bestie from Jewish Voices for Peace is representative of the majority of the group: they’re Gentiles, not Jews. Of the members who are actual Jews, most are self-loathing and grew up culturally Jewish but never even had a Bar Mitzvah or Bat Mitzvah. They represent a fraction of a fraction of the Jewish community, though you wouldn’t know that based on how much media time they’re given. (KING 5 is especially egregious at this; they’re the local news network for the new Nazis and they routinely focus the attention on Jewish voices that don’t come close to representing a Jewish viewpoint.)

The good news is that education can change the ignorant members of the new Nazi Youth. But they can still do a lot of damage between now and their willingness to read a history book.

Breaking my rule

Throughout my entire radio career, I steadfastly avoided labeling anyone I disagreed with a “Nazi.” In fact, I consistently called out those who used such rhetoric to demonize their opponents.

This stance became a guiding principle for me. Using Holocaust imagery or calling someone a Nazi cheapens the horrific suffering Jews endured. It’s particularly off-putting to me as a Jew. My go-to response to such accusations was, “When you find people who genuinely want to genocide the Jewish people, I’ll join you.”

But now, I’m breaking that rule because it’s relevant and the most accurate descriptor of what these activists believe and promote. Disagreement on a political issue doesn’t make one a Nazi — unless the political issue becomes Israel’s right to exist and defend against terrorists.

I don’t take any pleasure in calling people Nazis. It still feels wrong. Yet, I know that if I don’t use my platform to call out this hate — and those like Cauce who legitimize it — I won’t enjoy what will happen to me as a Jew.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s camp claimed this was merely a petty political ploy designed to confuse voters. However, Bob Ferguson from Graham sincerely believes he would have something to offer as Washington’s next governor. One of his top priorities is transparency and government waste

“My biggest questions about the state and what goes on is where does our tax dollars go? You know, I mean, why are we paying $800-$1,000 for car tabs when several times voters have said that they want that repealed? … Why are people that work in Gig Harbor and work in Tacoma still having to pay $6.50 every day to go to work?,” Ferguson told the Jason Rantz Show on AM 770 KTTH.

Ferguson also listed high gas prices and crumbling infrastructure as two of his primary concerns.

Did the attorney general have a legitimate legal case?

At a press conference with Attorney General Bob Ferguson Monday, former King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg said the other two Bob Fergusons were committing a crime by filing their candidacy for Governor. Citing section 4 of RCW 29A.84.320, Satterberg claimed that both candidates were attempting to “confuse and mislead the electors by capitalizing on the public reputation of the candidate who had previously filed.”

Bob Ferguson from Graham says legal action was not warranted because that was not his goal.

“That was not my intent at all. My intent was to win. Realistically, did I believe that my chances were great? No, but you know, you gotta shoot your shot.”

Conservative activist Glen Morgan, who has been considered the architect of this “stunt,” echoed this sentiment when he spoke with Jason Rantz earlier this week and insisted both Bob Fergusons sincerely wanted to run.

Ferguson also rejects the attorney general’s claims that he is a Republican who is attempting to meddle in Washington’s Democratic primary.

“I am nothing. I have voted Republican. I have voted Democrat. I have voted libertarian … So, I’m going to vote for whoever winds up more with me as an individual. I don’t care about parties. I think the two party system is stupid,” Ferguson from Graham said. Ferguson filed as a Democrat, but said that was merely a political calculation.

You can listen to the full interview by heading here or tapping the player below:

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Scott, who is so fringe he lost a Seattle City Council race in a district that includes equally fringe college students, is running for the state legislature. He hopes to replace the retiring Frank Chopp in the 43rd Legislative District. The community activist hopes to use his name recognition amongst activists in the district to catapult him to a more influential role in an already far-left state legislature.

But the progressive activist apparently expected to run unopposed. Scott now faces three challengers.

More from Jason Rantz: Bob Ferguson using ‘fake’ name in his run for Governor, misstated law to threaten opponent

Why is Shaun Scott complaining in his campaign ad?

In a campaign video posted to social media, Scott complained about having to face the challengers.

“Under normal circumstances, a candidate that is running in a very progressive district with the endorsement of an outgoing 30-year incumbent and with significant in-district name recognition, and the fundraising and volunteer energy to show it, that candidate would normally be running unopposed,” he said in the video.

Scott’s message received a cold reception from some on the far left, including Ashley Nerbovig, a reporter for the Stranger.

“No one is entitled to a free seat, even if they have name recognition, institutional backing, and a progressive platform. That would actually be s****y!” Nerbovig wrote.

Now that filing week is over and we have a challenger in this race, it's time to lock in and get a real win for everyday Washingtonians in the August 6 primary.

Social housing, labor rights, and fully funded public schools are on the line.

DONATE at https://t.co/sELLI3f5Wr. pic.twitter.com/IKQkW0rZps

— Shaun Scott 🌹🤝 (@eyesonthestorm) May 13, 2024

Criticism of Shaun Scott is spot on

Scott seems to think the seat should be his because he is a community activist who is farther to the left of Chopp. It very obviously shouldn’t be and his criticism reveals a deep insecurity of his far-left agenda. Why would he care if he’s challenged? He thinks he’s got “significant in-district name recognition and the fundraising and volunteer energy to show it.” So why feel threatened from his perspective?

Thankfully, his ideology is not as accepted as it once was and he should feel vulnerable. Seattle voters recently rejected extremist policies, understanding, for example, that the police defund movement and soft-on-crime policies created a crisis. Scott supports both defunding and soft-on-crime policies.

It’s abnormal to see an open seat in a large legislative district with just one candidate running unopposed. Even some of the most popular or secure incumbents get challengers. Indeed, Chopp has faced challengers.

The notion that he should run unopposed is part of a disturbing trend from younger left-wing activists. That they’re somehow entitled to get their way purely because they think they’re on the right side of issues is laughable, especially since their side is almost always to blame for chaos.

Shaun Scott makes up a challenger

The video’s introduction includes text indicating Scott is running “a Republican fundraiser.” He is not. Scott has three challengers, all of whom are Democrats.

The most notable challenger is Andrea Suarez, a homeless advocate who runs We Heart Seattle, one of the state’s most effective private groups addressing Seattle homelessness.

Suarez is very much a liberal, but she doesn’t subscribe to Scott’s extremist progressive position on homelessness. Suarez rejects “harm reduction” policies that enable homeless addicts to continue to use. Her approach to homelessness, which is appropriately apolitical, has certainly attracted the attention of Republicans.

She was briefly slated to be a keynote speaker at a King County Republican fundraiser but that offer to speak was rescinded when she announced her candidacy for office. The speech was not meant to be political or to express support for her campaign, since she’s a Democrat. To call Suarez a Republican fundraiser because of one speech booking that hadn’t even occurred is disingenuous, but likely helps Scott raise money amongst his activist base that views all Republicans as evil, while they complain about issues across the state that Republicans didn’t cause.

More from Jason Rantz: Glen Morgan says ‘no doubt’ duplicate Bob Fergusons would be ‘far better’ at running state

Shaun Scott once falsely implicated Republican college students in the death of a girl

It makes sense that Scott would overreact to a candidate who Republicans don’t loathe. He appears to be deeply triggered by Republicans.

When a 19-year-old college student tragically died at the University of Washington, Scott bizarrely blamed the campus College Republicans’ president. It was originally claimed that the student slipped on ice while on campus. Scott claimed she was the victim of “white masculinity,” and claimed that the then-president of the College Republicans was “credibly” accused of organizing “students to pour ice water on walkways.” At the time, Scott was running for Seattle city council.

“It isn’t the 1950s anymore, and you guys aren’t ‘Animal House.’ America is done suffering the ‘good clean fun’ of destructive White masculinity,” Scott tweeted at the time. “When I get elected, I will be your council member too. The community needs accountability from you.”

It’s not clear what “accountability” looked like, but Scott had to later walk back his irresponsible and dangerous claim. The student didn’t die as a result of slipping on ice. She died after collapsing from a blood clot in her lung. Scott wasn’t held accountable for his claims. In fact, he didn’t even offer an apology. Instead, he continued to attack innocent college students.

Scott did not respond to a request for comment.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Ferguson immediately cried foul, claiming this was a “direct attack” on both democracy and the integrity of the Washington state election system. Both Bob Fergusons, located in Graham and Yakima, subsequently dropped out.

More on duplicate Bob Fergusons: Both duplicate Bob Fergusons withdraw from governors race

But who was behind adding multiple Bob Fergusons? Glen Morgan, a conservative activist, took to Facebook admitting he was the “volunteer campaign manager” for both duplicate Bob Fergusons.

Multiple media outlets have since crowned him the “architect” of this “political stunt.”

“I don’t think it’s fair to say anything about me being an architect as both these guys wanted to run for office,” Morgan said on “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH 770 AM. “They both wanted to run for governor. And in particular, the Yakima Bob Ferguson had been wanting to run for some time. His friends at work had tried to convince him to run a year-and-a-half ago before his wife died and he was pretty inspired to jump in and run. He just always seemed that it was impossible for him to get over the hurdles — all of the crossing of the t’s and dotting the i’s of actually trying to run for office.”

Ferguson claimed Morgan did this only to “confuse voters and diminish votes,” which violates state law.

News reports confirm that a right-wing conservative paid the filing fee for two other unknown “Bob Fergusons.” The intent is clear – confuse voters and diminish votes.

The stakes could not be higher. This is a direct attack on our democracy and the integrity of the Washington… pic.twitter.com/UnpN5fxYXm

— Bob Ferguson (@BobFergusonAG) May 11, 2024

“I have to tell you, this jail time threat was, I think, unprecedented in the state of Washington,” Morgan said. “We’ve never seen these guys have just as much a right to run for office as anybody else. And threatening them with jail time was an excessive response by the Attorney General.”

Rantz on Bob Ferguson: On crime, Bob Ferguson’s campaign made its first massive blunder

Despite the other Fergusons not getting a real shot at challenging the current Attorney General, Morgan stated both candidates had legitimate reasons for running and a passion for public office.

“There’s no doubt that either one of these men would be far better and superior to Bob Ferguson not just as a human being, but also in governor,” Morgan said. “They both would be better and they both had campaign platforms. And both of them would have been far better getting into office.”

You can listen to the full interview here:

The Washington primaries will be held on Aug. 6, and the general election occurs on Nov. 5.

Frank Sumrall is a content editor at MyNorthwest. You can read his stories here and you can email him here.

There’s a problem with Ferguson’s logic. The “real” Bob Ferguson is doing exactly the same thing. Ferguson’s official campaign filings list his name as “Robert Ferguson,” which is different than what he goes by in his campaign.

This isn’t a big deal, as candidates do this all the time. There’s nothing illegal nor unethical about the move. But there’s something awfully fishy with the seemingly coordinated and carefully choreographed response to the Bob Ferguson candidates controversy. And it does more than reveal the hypocrisy of Ferguson’s talking points about democracy being under threat. It explains why his team knowingly misread the law they claimed the two other Bob Ferguson candidates broke.

More from Jason Rantz: After pushing to decriminalize, Bob Ferguson says he wants to tackle drug OD crisis

Did the two Bob Ferguson candidates actually break the law?

At a press conference this week, Ferguson used former King County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg to explain why the two Bob Ferguson candidates were violating RCW 29A.84.320. It’s unclear why Ferguson thought it was politically wise to use a former prosecutor best known for refusing to enforce the law, which led to historic fatal overdoses in King County (though given Ferguson and Satterberg share an opinion around drug decriminalization, it’s not surprising).

Satterberg argued the move was unlawful, specifically citing section 4: “(Using) A surname similar to one who has already filed for the same office, and whose political reputation is widely known, with intent to confuse and mislead the electors by capitalizing on the public reputation of the candidate who had previously filed.”

Intent is a very high bar to prove, so Ferguson and Satterberg leaned on the first name being used. Except, they appear to be purposefully redefining the RCW.

Bob Ferguson 2 and 3 weren’t using “similar” names. They were using identical names. That the OG Bob Ferguson focuses on Robert versus Bob isn’t even relevant. The RCW only applies to surnames. It’s certainly common for Democrats to change the definition of basic words — just ask them to define “woman” and you’ll find out. But for this RCW to apply, they’d need to redefine “similar” and “surname.”

Is the Secretary of State in cahoots with the Bob Ferguson campaign?

Ferguson and Satterberg seem to be redefining the RCW with the help of the Washington Secretary of State (SOS), who is supposed to remain neutral. But he’s very clearly not.

In a press release, Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, a Democrat, rails against the two Bob Ferguson candidates. His office is supposed to remain neutral when it comes to candidates. Instead, he parroted Attorney General (AG) Ferguson’s complaint.

“Voters deserve good-faith candidates who are running on the strength of their ideas to make Washington a better place to live and work, not people who pay a filing fee just to manipulate elections,” Hobbs said. “Washington’s long history of free and fair elections must be protected and preserved in every year and campaign cycle.”

There haven’t even been complaints filed against Ferguson 1 or 2, let alone a legal judgement. Yet Hobbs is declaring, as a matter of fact, that the two candidates violated the RCW.

The SOS is parroting Bob Ferguson arguments

Hobbs even includes the RCW in his press release. But he gets it wrong.

“RCW 29A.84.320 makes it a felony to declare as a candidate for public office under the name of a fictitious person, a false name, or in using the name of an incumbent or candidate who has already filed ‘with intent to confuse and mislead’ the voting public,” said the press release. But no, there’s nothing in there about using an identical name.

It’s a curious choice to leave out “similar surname.” But in another quote, he makes reference to section 4 of the RCW.

“Instances of people filing for office with names similar to well-known officeholders go back nearly a century in Washington and other states,” said Hobbs. Now he uses “similar” in reference to first names, even though the law cites surnames. Why is that?

More from Jason Rantz: Seattle will waste federal funds tackling drug crisis it created

Is there any campaign coordination going on?

Why did both the Ferguson campaign and SOS use section four of the RCW to make their case when it very specifically says surname?

Ferguson kept citing “Robert” as a way to dismiss the Fergusons. He could have quoted section two, which prohibits someone from using “the name of any person, not his or her true name.”

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH asked a Hobbs spokesperson if the secretary consulted an attorney prior to his press release on the RCW. The spokesperson neither confirmed, nor denied, merely explaining that the office “is in regular contact with our attorneys at the AG’s office, but those communications are generally considered confidential.”

Should we all rest assured knowing that Hobbs went through Bob Ferguson’s office to get guidance on a law that Bob Ferguson is using to threaten his opponents?

The spokesperson acknowledges that the office was in contact with Ferguson’s campaign — all three of them — to “alleviate voter confusion.” But the way the misleading legal argument is being offered by both Ferguson and Hobbs makes me wonder if there was any campaign coordination or if this is just a Democrat helping out a friend.

More from Jason Rantz: Concern as Democrat director privately tested ballot tabulation server

Why does any of this matter?

I don’t particularly like the idea of two Bob Ferguson candidates running. I won’t lie and say I didn’t find it funny and amusing. But it certainly is reasonable to question the ethics of the decision to run.

But I also don’t like how Ferguson and Hobbs are handling this. We can — and should — criticize both.

Ferguson is right to be upset. But he repeatedly implied that if the candidates don’t drop out as he demands, they face jail time. He may be saying it as a candidate, but he’s still the state’s Attorney General, and with that title comes a lot of power. This was abusive.

Hobbs is, arguably, the even bigger threat to our elections. He explicitly called out two candidates for office and made it clear that he was on Ferguson’s side, echoing the very legal arguments made by the original Ferguson campaign. It’s not his role to judge the motives of candidates running for office. He’s not even the one who would bring legal action against the candidates who he thinks violated the RCW.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Over the weekend, roughly 500 people showed up for a pro-Israel rally on Red Square. The intent was to walk through the Jew-hating encampment to show that local Jews, Christian supporters, and other allies, are not scared of the antisemitic students and their outside agitator friends. But the UW administration erected physical barriers and offered antisemitic encampment activists police protection as if the peaceful pro-Israel crowd was dangerous.

UW Police, flanked by Washington State Patrol (WSP) troopers, stood by on Sunday as Antifa thugs, decked out in black bloc, put up their own fencing around the barricade to keep Jews out. They had previously stolen campus bicycle racks to use as barricades. The UW didn’t merely allow it, they tacitly encouraged it.

Jason Rantz Exclusive: UW professor assaulted at autonomous Liberated Zone as admin keeps cops away

UW administration mostly ceded security to Antifa and Liberated Zone antisemites

Ahead of the pro-Israel rally, the UW inexplicably decided to keep one entrance in and one entrance out of the illegal encampment. That would ensure that should the pro-Israel rally march through the encampment as intended, they would be flanked by Antifa thugs and other antisemites who have openly harassed and assaulted Jews and supporters of Israel.

A UW spokesperson would not explain the decision to have only one way in and one way out of the encampment, even though they knew the one way in was heavily “guarded” by encampment activists. UW Police have been instructed to stay out of the autonomous UW Liberated Zone.

As pro-Israel rallygoers walked by, they were called “Nazis” by some in the pro-Hamas crowd. The encampment activists chanted various anti-Israel, pro-genocide and violent messages, including, “Long live the intifada.” At one point, the pro-Hamas crowd hit pro-Israel rallygoers with what is believed to be pepper spray. UW Police reportedly did not intervene.

Seattle Antifa actually thinks their flimsy fence is more effective with greenery hanging on it. Again: @uw president @amcauce is allowing this. pic.twitter.com/6ptZlqDKAf

— Jason Rantz on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) May 12, 2024

UW has become increasingly hostile toward Jews

The UW Liberated Zone has grown increasingly hostile and violent towards Jews and perceived Zionists (code for “Jews” or “supporters of Jews”). Last week, an activist assaulted UW professor Stuart Reges (on video) as other encampment antisemites stalked and harassed him. UW President Ana Marie Cauce would not provide a comment on the incident out of fear she’d upset the antisemites.

“It (the encampment) has now taken over the quad, and black-hooded and masked men carrying sticks have been seen marching menacingly across campus,” UW professor Carol Schiller reported.

Activists cosplaying as security stalk people they think are not on their side. They appear to be outsiders, not students. They coordinate with other faux-security guards as they follow “suspicious” Zionists around. At times, they block the visitors from filming signs calling for the end of Israel. At other times, they won’t allow entry to Zionists, which is a violation of the City of Seattle Title VI, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of political ideology and religion. (Anyone can file a complaint here.)

Cauce has remained mostly silent during the unrest and illegal encampment. And she’s done little to support Jewish students who feel terrorized on campus. Previously, when progressive students feigned outrage over a lawful College Republicans affirmative action bake sale, which called attention to the racism of affirmative action, Cauce was an outspoken critic of her student activists. She didn’t see a problem calling out a small group of conservative students.

While the UW comes down hard on fraternities that throw reasonable parties, the administration has allowed the encampment to govern itself and enforce strict border rules around who they allow inside the public space. The administration said it will only intervene when the situation becomes life-threatening.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

It was a gorgeous Sunday afternoon: 70 degrees and sunny with a nice, light breeze. I took my dog D’Artagnan out for a long walk and found myself at a new children’s playground constructed in South Lake Union. When I previously saw the area under construction, it didn’t take me long to figure out how it would be used by the homeless who have frequented the spot since it opened a few weeks ago.

The homeless man was laying on the grass, pants unbuttoned. I saw his hand and arm making movements that was a not-so-subtle hint at what he was doing. As I walked by, it was clear: He was pleasuring himself out in the open.

More from Jason Rantz: Tacoma business owner has box truck stolen twice in under three days

Did anyone care about the homeless Seattle man?

I can’t even pee in a public restroom when I sense someone is about to walk in. But this guy is just having at it in the middle of the afternoon in full view.

Behind him, a child and her dad were using the concrete slide (yeah, I don’t really understand the appeal either). In front of him, various passers-by were with their friends, moms for Mother’s Day or walking their dogs. Feet away to his left, two men were eating lunch at a table.

I was concerned and disgusted. But no one else seemed to mind what the homeless man was doing to their Seattle park.

I called the non-emergency number and waited on hold for more than five minutes before a dispatch operator took the details. I don’t know if she sent police to handle the handsy homeless man.

Rantz exclusive: UW professor assaulted at autonomous Liberated Zone as admin keeps cops away

“Free Gaza”

Across the street, I saw another Seattle … quirk.

An electronic road sign was placed to warn people that the road ahead was closed to traffic because of President Joe Biden’s visit. He comes to Seattle once every other year to snatch big money donations from Washington’s elite. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal took time out of her posting about how big money buys elections so that she could greet him at SeaTac airport, keeping people stuck in traffic longer than necessary.

The sign was inexplicably positioned to block the pedestrian signal, making it difficult for you to know when to safely walk across the street and not get hit by traffic coming from one of three separate directions. Seattle’s incompetence knows no bounds.

By Sunday, the president was gone and the electronic sign was hacked to read “Free Gaza.” Who could have seen this coming? If it said “MAGA Seattle” or “Jews lives matter,” it would have been taken down in a second and earned at least a press release condemning the electronic road sign crime!

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Angela Poe Russell, a fill-in host at KIRO Newsradio and former KING 5 journalist, reacted to Joe Scarborough on MSNBC covering a Forbes report about employers vowing to hire fewer Ivy League college graduates. They’re rightly concerned with the quality of students coming out of these elite schools, given the surge of antisemitism and abject historical ignorance coming from students there. Her criticism was the generalization from the anchor.

“While criticizing a school’s handling of a situation is fair and so is student behavior, good journalists know better than to make blanket statements about a group or a place. Having worked for years as a reporter, I know that within crowds are many stories and journalists should share them and offer context and nuance,” she wrote. “Columbia University has more than 30,000 students, either undergraduate or graduate level. If you compare that population to the number of on-campus protesters, it becomes impossible to talk about any university as if the students and their motivations or methods for protesting are exactly the same.”

This is fair criticism, I mostly agree, and it’s worth a read. I also hope you’ll listen to my conversation with Poe Russell; I truly enjoyed it.

But here’s a reasonable question for those of you who agree with her criticism: Why is it that we need additional context and nuance when it comes to rising antisemitism after experiencing nothing but generalizations about police and Donald Trump supporters? And aren’t we already getting a ton of “nuance and context” — in the form of whitewashing the antisemitism and violence?

Where’s the nuance in downplaying antisemitism, as a result of media bias?

Reporters, especially on the local level, are going through great pains to cover-up antisemitism on and off campus. It’s transparent media bias.

KING 5’s Cornelius Hocker, who consistently downplays antisemitism while demonizing Israel due to a clear left-wing bias, reported on this week’s Charlie Kirk speech at the University of Washington (UW). Though there were plenty of assaults, threats, harassment and vandalism against the media, none of it was mentioned in the piece. Instead, he said “it didn’t get that serious.” There was also no mention that the student activists and outside agitators wanted to cancel Kirk’s speech. Actually, Kirk wasn’t mentioned at all in the produced piece.

Also oddly missing from KING 5’s anti-Israel report? Jewish, pro-Israel, pro-free speech voices. The only interview for a story about a UW protest was a radical organizer who isn’t even a student. He uncritically spread a verifiably false claim that Israel is purposefully starving Palestinians.

Meanwhile, The Seattle Times posted the link to its article about UW’s recent Board of Regents meeting on X, formerly known as Twitter, categorizing anti-Israel activists as “anti war.” They’re not anti war. They’re against Israel’s war on Hamas. One cannot be anti war while calling for a “global intifada,” and chanting for the destruction of Israel. The article itself doesn’t offer any descriptors for the protesters (including the dubiously claimed “pro-Palestine” label). The Seattle Times doesn’t seem to hesitate in calling out “conservative activists,” though, defining them by an ideology rather than a viewpoint like “anti war,” even if it’s a lie.

KOMO News’ Joel Moreno was caught fabricating details about a Seattle anti-Israel rally. He said the rallygoers were “calling for peace” and “humanitarian aid” in Gaza. But the rallygoers were chanting for the destruction of Israel and openly supported violence against Jews. I have a video of Moreno listening to the chants promoting violence. Why didn’t those chants and messaging make it into his piece? Where was the context and nuance?

More from Jason Rantz: UW professor assaulted at autonomous Liberated Zone as admin keeps cops away

Media is consistently biased in favor of progressives

When the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement soared nationwide, did you get nuanced conversations about policing? Or did the media lean into anti-cop narratives, amplifying extremists who wanted to abolish police? When was the last time you saw media approach a Trump supporter with context and nuance rather than generalizations? Media outlets, outside of conservative media, generalize tens of millions of Americans as “MAGA extremists.” After January 6, were there any attempts to draw a distinction between rioters and your average Trump supporter? Of course not.

Poe Russell is right to call for nuance. There should be room for it, when necessary, in media coverage. In this case, I don’t think it’s necessary because the media doesn’t seem capable.

There’s only so much nuance one can offer before it (inadvertently or not) justifies or whitewashes antisemitism. Poe Russell is very obviously right that generalizing all Ivy League students is absurd. (They’re clearly not all antisemitic — though I do wish we’d see more students calling out the hate rather than letting it go unchallenged on campus).

And if we’re going to demand nuance (Poe Russell and I agree on how some past coverage of progressive events has been lacking), we need to demand it on all stories. Poe Russell seems very willing to make these demands, regardless of the political implications or influences of a news story. I don’t hear many liberal media members call out the industry. But it’s clear we need more news consumers to make these demands, as well. The media bias is too obvious and too accepted.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Ron Baker is a recovering alcoholic and addict. After going through recovery, he became clean and sober, deciding to start his life over with a gutter company and purpose. Work has been steady and he was starting to feel stability in his life. That made the theft of his box truck and thousands of dollars worth of tools and equipment last Friday, May 3, all the more painful.

“It’s been a rough road, but we’re just taking it one day at a time, waiting for the investigation,” Baker told “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

Was a suspect caught in the stolen box truck case?

Baker was relieved that the truck was recovered by police in Roy on May 6. The tools were taken, but some equipment survived the Tacoma theft.

The Pierce County Sheriff’s Office confirmed one suspect, Matthew Paul Snider, was arrested while sleeping in the truck. A resident saw the stolen box truck on her private property and called 911 to report it.

Snider “denied knowledge that the vehicle was stolen, despite the steering column and ignition being destroyed with exposed and stripped wiring hanging down,” according to the Pierce County Sheriff’s Office incident report. He was found with brass knuckles and a fixed-blade knife, according to the report.

After booking, he pleaded not guilty to an unlawful possession of a stolen vehicle charge. Snider was released by Judge Barbara McInvaille on his own personal recognizance. His next hearing is on June 4.

More from Jason Rantz: Seattle mayor establishing emphasis area, will jail suspects in Issaquah, at SCORE

What happened after police found the Tacoma theft victim’s truck?

Baker went to retrieve the box truck, but he said it was too tall for the tow truck. He was able to get it to a nearby gas station where he left it overnight, in full view of a surveillance camera that he assumed would be the protection he needed. It wasn’t.

“It was stolen again by the same group, for whatever reasons, and now we’re back to square one,” he explained, citing surveillance footage that made identifying the suspects easier. The Roy Police Department are now handling the case.

“It’s almost like waking up out of a bad dream, right? Stolen twice in three-and-a-half days,” he said.

More from Jason Rantz: Anonymous donor who gave $50K to house migrants in Kent revealed

A tough road ahead

While he’s trying to maintain high spirits — hoping a GoFundMe campaign will help — it’s hard to not realize the bind this allegedly theft puts him in.

“Being in recovery and starting over in the first place, here’s the deal: I’m month to month. I rent. I don’t have a credit card limit of $10,000 – $20,000, I don’t. My credit … I’m building it, it’s getting better. But me and my girl, our circumstances are not great.”

One thing that’s helping him cope with this setback? His experiences getting sober.

“With my coping today, thanks to the program and my life today — my other half is more angry and upset than I am. People want to go do this and that and it’s just not me today. (Getting angry) doesn’t get us anywhere. I know that G*d knows my heart, things will be OK. It’s another day. Getting mad and angry is just not going to solve anything.”

Baker said he hopes to rebuild his business with a new name, Grit City Gutters. He also says the community support since his story has spread has been inspiring. As of Thursday, his GoFundMe raised just shy of $5,000.

“A lady called and pitched in five bucks. She’s a single mom of three kids. I’m going to start crying right now, but it’s that little gesture right there to make you make you a human, you know?”

Photos of the damage to the box truck. (Photos obtained by The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH)

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

The president is in town to raise money for his fledgling re-election campaign. He’ll be flying into SeaTac instead of Boeing Field to ensure maximum gridlock. If we’re lucky, we might get a half dozen gaffes to help fill our radio shows, while television news pretends they didn’t happen. But, better than a gaffe, when either President Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris comes to town, city (county and state) leadership is somehow able to act with urgency to tackle downtown’s blight.

While most every other week of the year the city refuses to tackle homelessness and open-air drug use with gusto, they’re somehow able to muster the energy to do its job when someone they care about impressing is here. Should city leadership aim to impress taxpayers and visitors fueling our economy? Of course. Do they? Nope. We’re the saps who keep paying taxes without a return on our investment while voting the same people into office most of the time.

More from Jason Rantz: UW Seattle professor assaulted at autonomous Liberated Zone as admin keeps cops away

Why is Seattle going to be suddenly cleaned up?

It’s always instructive to experience a presidential visit (or Major League Baseball All-Star game and soon the World Cup). It shows all of us what the city is capable of accomplishing when motivated.

The problem is that voters don’t motivate Democrats to clean the city up; voters merely inspire lawmakers to pass more taxes to fuel ineffective pet projects that make them feel good about their policy failures. That’s not their fault. It’s ours. Like children, politicians will act up and misbehave so long as we let them. When voters punish the bad behavior, the lawmaker corrects himself or herself. But without consistency, they turn back to the bad behavior. Seattle and area voters are consistently inconsistent.

The White House, however, demands the ideal visit is free of homelessness in the background of any photo of the president — from the motorcade to his hotel to his campaign stops. He doesn’t actually visit the city. He won’t see 99% of it. But the routes he takes in and out are highly trafficked and highly polluted with litter, graffiti and homeless encampments. Those will be cleaned up.

Jason Rantz Show Exclusive: Seattle mayor establishing emphasis area, will jail suspects in Issaquah, at SCORE

At least a weekend of a nice downtown Seattle. You should visit

In fact, we’ll get at least a weekend’s worth of a cleaned-up city.

Not that city leadership will admit what they’re doing. They drafted their media responses when they learned of the visit weeks ago: “(Insert encampment location) was scheduled to be cleaned up months ago!” or “We did not sweep any encampment at (insert location). I’m unfamiliar with what you previously observed.” We even already know the media outlets that will amplify the lie or completely ignore the suddenly cleaned-up city.

While it’ll be nearly impossible to cleanse downtown streets of the smell of urine so substantial you can feel it in the back of your throat, if Biden is planning to stay overnight at the Westin per usual, there will be fewer homeless addicts roaming the streets, scaring tourists and locals. We will, like during the All-Star Weekend, experience a city we deserve (at least a few block’s worth). It’s a great time for a visit (just be ready for traffic all day Friday).

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

The Issaquah (WA) School District will allow two elementary school students to start an interfaith prayer club at Creekside Elementary School. The school previously denied the fifth-grader’s request to start the club though it actively promoted more than a dozen non-religious clubs, including a Pride Club and the Green Team. After advocacy from First Liberty attorneys and Mark C. Lamb of Carney Badley Spellman, P.S., the school district reversed course.”

Original story:

Two local students allege their school principal is denying them the ability to form an interfaith club. Their lawyer says it is religious discrimination. 

Lawyer Kayla Toney, with First Liberty Institute, is representing the two students at Creekside Elementary in Sammamish. They are threatening to sue the school for its refusal to allow a prayer club students wanted to create to feel more accepted for their religious views. While the school did not specifically say they didn’t want a religious club, Toney believes they are not providing equal treatment. 

“The reason (the principal) gave was that clubs had already been established for the year back in October. Now, nobody knew that. Apparently, there was a meeting that was not publicized when the budget was decided on in October, as far as we can tell. But the Pride Club had been allowed to start just a week before Laura’s request in February,” Toney said on The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH.

Was the club denied because of religious discrimination?

Toney noted there was also a marimba club that was given the green light to start in a couple of weeks — right before the end of the school year.

“It just didn’t seem like equal treatment. And the Constitution and the Supreme Court guarantee equal treatment for religious clubs,” she added. 

This is not the first time the state of Washington has been embroiled in a religious liberty battle.  

High school football coach Joe Kennedy took his case, against the Bremerton School District, all the way to the Supreme Court in 2022 after he was not allowed to pray at midfield after a game. He eventually won his case in a 6-3 decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District.

Toney sent a letter to the school on April 9 and has given them two weeks to respond. If they do not reply by Monday, they plan to go to court. 

You can listen to KTTH Host Jason Rantz’s full interview with Toney here or click on the player below.

Editors note: This piece was originally published on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, and has been updated since then.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show weekdays from 3 p.m. – 7 p.m. on AM 770 KTTH or on-demand wherever you listen to podcasts.

Computer sciences professor Stuart Reges was touring the growing antisemitic encampment for “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH on Tuesday morning. Within minutes, as had been the case when he previously arrived, Reges was immediately swarmed by activists acting as security.

“Within a few minutes, I had three people surrounding me with umbrellas. That grew to five people surrounding me with umbrellas,” Reges exclusively told “The Jason Rantz Show.” “And they have some code, I guess, where they say, ‘Doctor, Doctor, there’s a doctor coming,’ which means somebody’s filming. So you’re supposed to mask up so they won’t see your face.”

Minutes later, the professor was hit in the back of the head by an unidentified male activist. The man fled after the assault.

“I suddenly got hit in the side of the head. Boom, really hard hit in the side of the head. People were shocked. You could kind of hear from the protesters, that they were like, ‘Whoa.’ And this guy runs off,” Reges explained.

More from Jason Rantz: UW Seattle activists say their First Amendment rights threatened by speaker they don’t like

What does the recording of the assault at the UW Liberated Zone show?

Reges was filming via his cell phone at the time of the assault. In the video, you hear a thud on his head, followed by an activist saying, “Hey! Back up, back up. Get out of here! Go on.” He dropped his phone from the force of the unexpected assault.

“I was just struck by someone, very hard, in the head,” Reges tells one of the protesters.

“Are you alright?” another masked activist asked. He then immediately said, “They are not affiliated with us. We’re not here to attack people. I don’t know where they came from. That’s why they ran off.”

Reges responded by noting there is Antifa symbols tagged around the encampment.

“Do you have Antifa folks here?” Reges asked.

“Uh, no comment on that,” the activist responded.

‘There’s some soreness … a little lightheaded’

Reges declined to see one of the encampment medics, before walking away. He was, again, surrounded by activists with umbrellas, harassed and stalked, until he left.

“There’s some soreness and you know, a little lightheaded, you know, but if it gets worse, I know that if I start experiencing dizziness, or something, that I should seek medical care. So I think I’m OK. It wasn’t that hard of a hit. It was more just kind of jolting, that book, I get hit from behind when I wasn’t expecting it,” Reges said.

When he returned to his office, Reges reported the assault to the UW Police (UWPD). Officers are not being allowed to proactively enter the zone because their presence would anger activists.

More from Jason Rantz: Watch an unhinged student yell ‘shame’ at pro-Israel man at UW encampment

UW administrators refuse to take action

UW administrators, including President Ana Marie Cauce, are aware of activists harassing and stalking Reges and anyone else they do not wish to be inside their encampment. But they refuse to act.

A UW spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on the assault at the Liberated Zone.

Previously, an administrator indicated that the UW Police will not engage until there’s a life-threatening emergency.

“UWPD will monitor the event actively from the start and be prepared to respond if the event escalates and threatens life safety … The priorities are always safety for all and continuity of university operations,” Vice President for Campus Security and Safety Sally Clark said, according to a document obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

Reges isn’t surprised that he was assaulted. He fears the encampment will continue to escalate and there will be more violence.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz