Tag Archive for: abortion

‘Tragic’: Cities Use Federal COVID-19 Money to Fund Abortion, Planned Parenthood

/in , , , , , , , /by

In city governments across the United States, officials are seeking to use federal COVID-19 funds intended to preserve life to fund abortion and benefit the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, an outcome pro-life leaders call a “tragic” and foreseeable misuse of funds.

Earlier this month, Toledo’s city council proposed ordinance 530-21, which would spend $100,000 in American Rescue Plan funds to pay for Ohio women to travel out of state to obtain an abortion. The funds would go to the Agnes Reynolds Jackson Fund, one of the nation’s network of abortion funds, which defer but do not cover the full price of an abortion — a decision that has outraged state pro-life leaders.

Meanwhile the city of Rochester, New York, has selected Planned Parenthood of Central and Western NY as one of 20 members of its “Rochester Peace Collective,” which will split $5 million in American Rescue Plan funding. Mayor Malik Evans, a Democrat, said the organizations deserve these “front-end investments,” because have the ability “to intervene in the lives of people who maybe have been impacted by violence.” The Toledo ordinance also says its terms are “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety and property.”

Yet pro-life advocates say abortion is violence, not health care. “It is tragic to see the abortion industry once again exploiting a health crisis as a way to line their pockets with taxpayer funding,” Connor Semelsberger, director of federal affairs at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand.

“Using funds allocated for COVID recovery to enable the taking of innocent lives and the harming of mothers and their children is both unjust and immoral,” said Roman Catholic Bishop Daniel E. Thomas. “It is our responsibility as faithful servants of God to spearhead legislation to make it easier for mothers and fathers to flourish economically so they can provide a loving and thriving home for their families.” The Ohio-based Center for Christian Virtue, a state affiliate of FRC, set up a webpage enabling Ohioans to contact Toledo City Council members and politely voice their opposition. “It’s hard to imagine a more gross abuse of taxpayer dollars,” said CCV President Aaron Baer. He may find a receptive audience: Council member Vanice Williams, who supports abortion-on-demand, opposes the measure, because “we really need to hone in on what we spend these ARPA dollars on.”

Similarly, in Rochester, pro-family advocates oppose the $225,000 grant for Planned Parenthood’s sex education program, as it uses taxpayer dollars to link minors to Planned Parenthood’s website.

These cities, which have not yet acted, are far from alone in using federal health care funds to promote abortion. In July St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones, a Democrat, signed a bill using $1 million of federal COVID relief funds to pay for abortion travel, or childcare, for women seeking to have an abortion — something she said fulfilled her campaign promises and dovetailed with her political philosophy. “I said I would fight like hell to make sure St. Louisans can access the reproductive health care they need,” she vowed. Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt, a Republican, filed a lawsuit against the measure immediately.

“Atlanta; Chicago; Columbus, Ohio; Fresno, Calif.; Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn.; New York City; and Seattle directed state or municipal funding to abortion access. Cuyahoga County, Ohio; and St. Louis, Mo., directed funding from the American Rescue Protection Act to abortion access,” reported the far-Left Nation magazine.

Pro-life advocates say the outcome was anything but a surprise. “As the American Rescue Plan Act was being assembled Family Research Council and many other groups warned that” the ARPA funding would underwrite elective abortions “unless the bill clearly defines what healthcare funding can and cannot be used for, or has explicate language to prevent it from subsidizing abortion.”

“The American Rescue Plan Act lacks key abortion funding restrictions,” Semelsberger warned FRC readers at the time. “This is government irresponsibility at its worst,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins.

Upon passage of the $1.9 trillion plan — which took place in March 2021, as COVID had already begun to recede and the economy was rebounding — Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson hailed President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Democratic congressional leaders as “health care champions” for preserving abortion funding in the American Rescue Plan.

“As Roe becomes a fainting memory it is important to remember that there is no longer a federal right to an abortion as established by our courts and therefore should not be subsidized on the taxpayer’s dime,” Semelsberger told TWS.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Killing Unborn Children Will Never Solve Maternal Mortality

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Since its founding, the abortion industry has always targeted minority and economically disadvantaged women as its prime sources of profit. Today, this anti-life narrative often takes the form of arguing that protecting life in the womb will exacerbate the nation’s maternal mortality crisis — a lie that a bogus new study from Boston University and the Commonwealth Fund attempts to perpetuate.

In the study, titled “The U.S. Maternal Health Divide,” the researchers claim that passing pro-life laws in the states will lead to an increase in maternal mortality and the disintegration of existing maternal health care. The legacy media wasted no time in elevating the report, with outlets like The Hill writing, “The new findings from The Commonwealth Fund confirm what many advocates feared: scrapping Roe v. Wade would have a disproportionate impact on women of color and worsen maternal health overall.”

The pro-abortion narrative is set — the only problem? The study doesn’t actually provide evidence or statistically significant data backing up the claim that protecting life in the womb augments maternal mortality. Rather, the study attempts to correlate the pre-Dobbs maternal and infant mortality rates between 2018 and 2020 with where the state laws now stand on protecting life in the womb in a post-Roe America.

One glaringly obvious issue with the narrative portrayed by this study is that under Roe v. Wade, no state had the ability to enforce a meaningful protection for life in the womb prior to viability. This means that during the period studied, practically speaking, the states now enforcing pro-life protections were indistinguishable from the states that currently allow abortion through 40 weeks of pregnancy.

Furthermore, during the three-year period studied, 20 of the 26 pro-life states reported at least a one-year increase in abortions, with several seeing increases across both years. If abortion were negatively correlated to maternal mortality, then an increase in abortion would cause a decrease in maternal mortality; however, increased rates of abortion in states that are now pro-life did nothing to alleviate the maternal mortality crisis in these states.

The study ignores regions such as our nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., where women are almost twice as likely to die from pregnancy complications as mothers in the rest of the nation. The city also maintains one of the most liberal abortion laws in the United States; an abortionist in D.C. can kill a child in the womb at any point in pregnancy, and the abortionist does not need to be a doctor. The D.C. Abortion Fund directly finances abortions for abortion-minded mothers who struggle financially. If abortion were the solution to maternal mortality, why does unlimited abortion fail to remedy the maternal mortality crisis in areas like D.C.?

The answer, of course, is that killing a child in the womb is not a valid solution to any problem — nor is pregnancy itself the problem when addressing maternal mortality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that 63.2% of all pregnancy-related deaths are preventable. Treating abortion as the solution to the maternal mortality crisis is a waste of time, money, and energy that would be far better directed to addressing real disparities in human flourishing.

For example, limited access to convenient and quality health care plays a major role in whether a woman is healthy before, during, and after her pregnancy. The Commonwealth Fund study attempts to characterize abortion as a solution to maternity care deserts. Of the 26 pro-life states analyzed, the majority are predominately rural, making the solution to a maternity care desert much more complex than simply opening a new hospital. Innovative medical resources, like telehealth services and mobile maternity care units, would go a long way in addressing the maternal health care disparities that abortion attempts to camouflage.

Likewise, abortion is not the solution to poverty. Nine of the top 10 states with the highest poverty rate in the country are states with pro-life protections in place. Poverty often predicts a mother’s ability to access quality health insurance, healthy food, and pharmaceutical resources. In these instances, mothers require assistance to access the resources needed to experience a healthy pregnancy and postpartum lifestyle — not abortion.

A quick glance under the hood of the Commonwealth Fund study reveals the major logical leaps that a reader must make in order to accept the claim that pro-life laws increase maternal mortality. Beneath the misleading pro-abortion framing, however, the report holds some truth: our nation really is suffering from a maternal mortality crisis. But one must only look around the abortion propaganda to recognize that telling poor and minority women that their safest pregnancy outcome is to kill their child is not a real solution.

AUTHORS

Joy Stockbauer

Joy Stockbauer is a policy analyst for the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council.

Connor Semelsberger

Connor Semelsberger is Director of Federal Affairs – Life and Human Dignity at Family Research Council.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘The Left Is Out For Blood’: Biden’s DOJ ‘Weaponizing’ Law To Arrest ‘Political Enemies,’ Former Official Says

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The Biden administration is “weaponizing” the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act to go after pro-life activists, an attorney who served under George W. Bush and Barack Obama told the Daily Caller.

“The left is out for blood, and Biden’s base is demanding prosecutions and the DOJ is providing them,” said Roger Severino, who served as an attorney at the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights division, the same division that enforces the FACE Act.

The Biden administration has charged at least 16 pro-life activists with a maximum of 11 years in prison for alleged violations of the act, which prohibits obstructing people seeking reproduction services. Pro-life activist Mark Houck allegedly pushed an abortion escort to the ground after a verbal confrontation. FBI agents swarmed Houck’s house and took him away at gunpoint months after the initial charges against him were dropped.

The DOJ charged the other 15 pro-lifers with allegedly obstructing entrances of abortion clinics and they face a maximum of 11 years in prison, when, under the law, first time violators of the FACE Act usually face a maximum of six months.

Past administrations have issued multi-year prison sentences for violations of the FACE Act in cases of a fatal shooting, death threats, and damaging an abortion clinic with a Molotov cocktail, while people obstructing entrances to abortion clinics faced monetary fines and restraining orders.

Houck is being charged with the decade-long version of the FACE Act violation because the abortion escort “scraped his arm,” his attorney Peter Breen told the Daily Caller. “The charges shouldn’t apply at all, but even if they did, he’s being overcharged.”

“It’s outrageous that you would take a six-month misdemeanor … and turn it into a 10-year federal felony,” Breen added.

One of the other pro-lifers facing over a decade in prison, Paul Vaughn, never blocked the door of an abortion clinic, but was standing nearby, Breen claimed.

Severino, who served under both former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2008 to 2015, said he’s “never heard of a charge being so excessive” as the 11-year maximum prison sentence and $350,000 fine put forth by the current administration for allegedly obstructing abortion clinic doors.

“This is law enforcement run amok. The FACE Act had always been enforced very rarely, because the pro-life movement is a movement of peace,” Severino said. “All of a sudden, they are inventing cases and doing sham prosecutions in an election year for purely political purposes to go after their political enemies.”

The DOJ did not respond to an inquiry from the Daily Caller asking if they have comment on whether the Biden administration has used the FACE Act more excessively than previous administrations.

The FACE Act also protects houses of worship and pro-life pregnancy centers, both of which have been firebombed across the country after the Dobbs decision. Thirty-three churches and 54 pregnancy centers have been attacked, according to the Catholic News Service. The DOJ has not prosecuted any cases of destruction against pro-life centers, Severino stressed.

The effort to arrest pro-lifers is specifically being pushed before the midterms, Department of Homeland Security official under the Trump administration, Ken Cuccinelli, told the Daily Caller.

“This has nothing to do with public safety. This is political virtue signaling to the radical-left base that has control of this administration,” Cuccinelli said.

“I think it will thoroughly backfire on them. I can’t think of a way they’ll get one more vote because they arrest these people, but I guarantee you, a lot [more] pro-lifers will stay home than might have for the midterm election,” he added.

AUTHOR

DIANA GLEBOVA

White House reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DOJ Charges 11 Pro-Life Activists For Blocking Abortion Clinic, Threatens Massive Prison Sentences

Biden DOJ Trying To ‘Intimidate People Of Faith,’ Says Lawyer For Pro-Life Activist Arrested By FBI

Pro-Life Groups Sound The Alarm Over Repeated Attacks, Call Out FBI, DOJ For Not Doing Enough

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The FBI’s Double Standard on Abortion

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

“They know who these people are. They’re choosing not to make arrests.”

Last month, The Mother and Unborn Baby Care Center, a pregnancy center in Southfield, Michigan, was vandalized causing thousands of dollars in damages. Graffiti left behind reading, “If abortion isn’t safe neither are you, Jane” linked the attack to Jane’s Revenge, a leftist pro-abortion domestic terrorist group that is believed to be responsible for as many as 50 attacks on pregnancy centers and pro-life groups.

Southfield police notified the FBI which refused to comment on the case.

After 18 attacks directly claimed by Jane’s Revenge over a period of six months, the FBI has made zero arrests. But while under Biden the feds have shown no interest in a national campaign of leftist terrorism, the FBI has been swift to come after abortion opponents.

The same month as the Southfield attack, an FBI team of 25 armed agents pounded on the door of of an anti-abortion activist in Pennsylvania who had been accused of shoving a Planned Parenthood escort. A nationwide campaign of domestic terrorism didn’t trigger a single arrest, but a shove brought heavily armed men in over a dozen vehicles to a suburban home.

The FBI has claimed that “the number of personnel and vehicles widely reported as being on scene Friday is an overstatement” and that its tactics were “professional”. The actual professional tactic would have been to ask the gentleman in question to turn himself in.

But under Biden and Garland, the DOJ has engaged in a campaign of political intimidation.

Biden’s DOJ put out a statement about the incident by his nominee, Jacqueline C. Romero, who was touted as the “first woman of color and first LGBTQIA+ person to become U.S. attorney.”

“Violating the FACE Act by committing a physical assault is a serious crime for which the FBI will work to hold offenders accountable,” Jacqueline Maguire, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Philadelphia Division, who had been featured in Women’s History Month, warned.

The FACE Act, introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy, who had killed a woman some said may have been carrying his child in the first known example of a senatorial underwater abortion, means that the FBI will come pounding on doors over a shoving incident at an abortion clinic, but pregnancy centers can be torched across the country without a word.

On paper, the FACE Act also protects pregnancy centers, but the extremely differing enforcement standards by Biden’s DOJ and the FBI make it all too clear that it does not.

Also in September,  Christopher Moscinski, a Franciscan friar, who was already serving time on state charges for “occupying” the waiting room of a New York abortion clinic, was hit with FACE federal charges by the Biden administration for padlocking the gates of an abortion clinic and then laying “his body in front of the gate, blocking vehicles from entering the health center’s parking lot”. Environmentalist protesters routinely lie down in the street to block traffic. No one sends in the feds after them. They occupy government buildings and they don’t go to prison.

Moscinski’s actions were illegal, but leftist protesters routinely engage in the same kind of behavior, locking and blocking entrances and call it civil disobedience. There are few consequences if any for this behavior. And no pro-abortion protesters rallying outside pregnancy centers have faced FACE Act charges, let alone aggressive FBI aids on their homes.

But Biden’s DOJ keeps using the FACE Act to target pro-life protesters outside abortion clinics while issuing pro-abortion political statements that make its political agenda clear.

Philip Sellinger, another Biden nominee and a leading Democrat fundraiser, celebrated a FACE Act campaign against a street evangelist by declaring, “Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental right…  Individuals must be able to access facilities like the Englewood clinic to make decisions about their own bodies.” That was not a legal statement by a US Attorney, but a political statement by an aspiring Democrat politician abusing federal law enforcement authority.

But Sellinger was just echoing Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland, who had responded to the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling by attacking the court for having “eliminated an established right that has been an essential component of women’s liberty for half a century” and announcing that the DOJ  “strongly disagrees with the Court’s decision”.

Garland went even further in his insurrection against the Constitution and the Supreme Court by warning that he would employ the FACE Act to “protect healthcare providers and individuals seeking reproductive health services in states where those services remain legal”.

Biden’s own Beria clearly meant only one kind of service. The kind that ends a child’s life.

The DOJ’s Reproductive Rights Task Force has weaponized the FACE Act under Vanita Gupta, a leftist veteran of the ACLU and the NAACP, and racked up charges against anti-abortion protesters. Since the attacks on pregnancy centers are being investigated under FACE Act violations, it is quite likely that they’re being routed to the DOJ’s Abortion Task Force.

And the Abortion Task Force’s response would be to cheer on Jane’s Revenge.

The lack of trust has become so severe that Reverend James Harden, the head of a pregnancy center in New York, has filed suit against the FBI to return surveillance footage from the attack. The FBI took the footage, but has refused to share it with CompassCare: the victimized clinic.

According to Harden, the video shows license plates and other identifying footage. And yet after over 100 days, the FBI has made no arrests and refuses to turn over the video.

“They know who these people are. They’re choosing not to make arrests,” Harden charged.

Meanwhile, local authorities claimed to be worried that releasing the video would play into the hands of right-wing “nut jobs out there with guns and AK-47s, bombing and killing people.”

Late last month, the FBI canceled a visit meant to look into the firebombing of the clinic.

Even while leftist pro-abortion terrorists continue vandalizing and firebombing pregnancy centers, Democrat politicians at the federal and state level have targeted those same centers with legislation meant to shut them down in an effort to achieve the same terroristic goals.

In Los Angeles, Democrats are trying to impose a $10,000 fine for anyone who claims to have been misled into thinking that pregnancy centers also provide baby-terminating services. A similar attempt in California had already been struck down by the Supreme Court years ago.

Senator Elizabeth Warren introduced the Stop Anti-Abortion Disinformation Act which tries to use the FTC to target pregnancy centers. Senator Mark Warner and House Democrats demanded that Google go even further in censoring pregnancy centers from its search results.

Jane’s Revenge, or whichever combination of activists are operating under that name, is just the direct action arm of a leftist movement that is coordinating a campaign against pro-life groups. And the Biden administration is using its control over the DOJ and the FBI to implement it, ignoring violence by its political allies while ruthlessly going after acts of civil disobedience.

Under Merrick Garland, the DOJ has become the enforcement arm of the Left. Justice can only return to the Department of Justice when Garland and the other cronies have left the building.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

RELATED VIDEOS:

Paul Vaughn of Personhood Tennessee on Tucker Carlson

FBI Arrests Pro-Life Father in Front of Family

U.S. Senator John Kennedy Releases Funniest Campaign Ad Ever

RELATED ARTICLES:

I Met And Prayed With The Pro-Life Leader Arrested By The Biden Gestapo

It Can’t be Criminal to Peacefully Protest Abortion But OK to Firebomb Pregnancy Centers

Jill Biden Celebrates Friend Who Killed Her Baby in Abortion

Kamala Harris Has Headlined More Than 20 Events to Promote Killing Babies in Abortions

Abortion Activist Demands Closing Catholic Hospitals Because They Don’t Kill Babies

Scientists Confirm Unborn Babies Feel Pain as Early as 8 Weeks

Heartbreaking Images Show 26-Week-Old Unborn Baby Killed in Abortion

Stacey Abrams Doesn’t Care That More Black Babies are Killed in Abortions Than Born Alive

Feminist Complains Abortion Bans Mean “I Have to be More Careful When I Have Sex”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

New Poll Delivers Some Alarming News For Democrats

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Voters overwhelmingly trust Republicans to manage the economy, a new poll ahead of this year’s midterm elections suggests, while

Roughly 52% of voters said that they trust Republicans to manage the economy, compared to 38% for Democrats, while only 1% of respondents said they agreed with the proposals of both parties to manage it, according to a poll conducted by the Times and Siena College, which measured the relative strength of both parties in advance of the election scheduled on Nov. 8. The economy has been the most important issue to voters heading into the polls; in a July edition of the same NYT/Siena poll, 20% called it the “most important problem facing the country today,” while roughly 76% said that it would be “extremely important” to them as they vote.

Democrats have sought to focus their campaign narrative on social issues such as abortion in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s overturning by the Supreme Court, as well as gun regulations following mass shootings across the country over the summer.

However, efforts to place social issues at the forefront of voters’ minds do not appear to be working. The NYT/Sienna poll revealed that voters consider economic issues more important to their voting decision than social issues, by an 18-point margin.

The polls come at a time of bad economic news for the Biden administration before November’s election. The White House recently released an economic blueprint listing its various accomplishments, with President Joe Biden holding a series of events to highlight the “Inflation Reduction Act,” a massive spending package that his administration had proposed to the Democratic-controlled Congress.

The Consumer Price Index, an aggregate measure of inflation, increased by 0.1% from July to August, though tempered by reductions in the price of gasoline even as food costs rose, according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. The news poorly affected stock markets over the week, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling by 1,600 points beginning Monday, closing for the week at 30,841.05 points.

There was some good news for Democrats, who currently control Congress and the White House. Between July and September, the number of voters who believe the country is “heading on the right track” increased modestly, from 27% to 50% for Democrats, and 9% to 27% for independents; however, 53% expressed disapproval of Biden’s performance in office.

The poll surveyed 1,399 registered voters nationwide from Sept. 6 to 14, 2022, its margin of sampling error was +/- 3.6 percentage points.

The White House and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had not responded to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

ARJUN SINGH

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Three ‘October Surprises’ Loom Over The Midterms. Will They Sink The Dems – And America, Too?

Federal Court Upholds Texas Social Media Bill, Rules Corporations Do Not Have ‘Right’ To Censor

John Kerry, Who Owned 5 Homes And A Private Jet, Cautions Impoverished African Nations Against Natural Gas Projects

NBC Deletes Tweet Comparing Immigrants To ‘Trash’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

No Safe Space: Chemical Abortion and Trafficked Daughters

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

“My strategy was to be unseen. I became numb. Most abuse victims don’t know they are victims. We just know that this is life.” — Darlene, survivor

Darlene was 13 when she was first molested. To this day, she remembers running and hiding under the bed, desperate to disappear. “It just sort of flipped a switch in me, because I had no safe place anymore.” Fatherless, she watched her mom go from one abusive relationship to the next, until one day Darlene just stopped going to school. “That was when my world seemed to completely spiral out of control,” she admits. “[A] guy came to my neighborhood who was so jovial and so friendly to everybody. He was so magnetic is the only thing I can think of. All the kids in the neighborhood gravitated to him — and I had no idea that I was his target.”

By her 14th birthday, she was a commodity. “The first time he sold me was to a businessman,” Darlene thinks back. “He was a bouncer at an illegal gambling ring, and he’d bring me to that back alley — and he’d leave me in the car and men would use me there, over and over and over. And then when he opened the door, he said, ‘Gee, you look like hell.’ … I was beaten, gang-raped, drugged, dragged, and bruised in a sick game of dehumanization.” No one, not even her mother, stopped it. “Sometimes I was out on the streets for days at a time, sometimes weeks.” Her buyers were businessmen, city councilors, professionals, criminals.

After she’d been passed around for five years, she was sold to a man who told her, “in graphic detail how he’d forced other girls to have an abortion.” By that point, Darlene had been trafficked so long, she thought she couldn’t get pregnant. “I didn’t think it would happen,” she said. Until she did. When her abuser found out, he threatened to kill her if she tried to escape without having an abortion. “He even threatened to do it himself.” Terrified, she threw herself at his feet, begging him not to force her. He threw the phone in her lap and waited until she called and made an appointment. “In my mind, I had no choice,” she remembers.

Years have passed, but there are thousands of other Darlenes trapped in horror stories like hers. This very second, there are men online, in malls, walking through neighborhoods, luring girls away from unhappy homes with one goal: to sell them and use them for sex. Like Darlene, they’ve been kicked, beaten, starved, punished, and forced to subject themselves to a level of brutality and humiliation most of us can’t comprehend. Most of these young girls end up pregnant — as many as 71% according to one report. And not just once. Multiple times. “A third of women trafficked ‘underwent numerous abortions as victims of trafficking’” — most against their will.

Now, with Roe v. Wade gone, and abortion activists frantic to protect their biggest business, the plot has become more sinister: abortion pills, through the mail, where no one has to know. The new back-alley method that gives predators like Darlene’s an even easier way to inflict harm.

Before the abortion industry invented chemical killing, there was at least a good possibility that abused and hurting girls would see an adult face to face, a nurse or health care worker in a safe place where they could tell the truth and get help. And while abortion centers like Planned Parenthood’s were notorious about covering up these nightmarish crimes, there was a better chance of teenagers breaking their silence and getting rescued — than removing all supervision and forcing them to go through this dangerous abortion process alone.

As so many doctors have warned, these are lethal drugs. The Left tells women that it’s a simple, safe, natural, and private process. What they don’t tell them is stories like Solome’s. “I had blood all over my legs and went in the tub to wash them. The cramps got so bad I couldn’t even move. I couldn’t even cry…” she testified to the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus. “I couldn’t get to my phone to dial 911 and go to the emergency room…” There was so much pain and blood, she thought she might die. “I haven’t really healed from my experience, and I don’t know if I ever will.”

Imagine the harm rapists and other predators could do if these drugs were as available as the Biden administration is demanding. Children, innocent women, and sex victims of all kinds would be in an endless cycle of violence — with no guarantee that they would survive the complications. Because the last place a serial abuser is going to rush his victims is an emergency room where the girls would have easy access to law enforcement.

And yet, President Biden, controlled by the radicals in his party, has decided to take the side of those monsters, demanding that states make it easier for everyone to get their hands on these deadly drugs. In a term that has redefined extremism, he has decided to become the president of predation. “As our nation faces another significant health care crisis, this guidance is to remind the roughly 60,000 retail pharmacies in the United States of the unique role pharmacies play in ensuring access to comprehensive reproductive health care services,” according to Health and Human Services.

This, Dr. Ingrid Skop warns, despite the fact that chemical abortions have four times as many complications as surgical abortions. The Biden administration, she explained on “Washington Watch,” took away all in-person supervision.

“They can get it delivered by mail without ever encountering a doctor. … [And] these medications work by cutting off hormonal support and then causing contractions. The further along a woman is, the more likely it is to fail. When it fails there, the woman is at risk for infection. She’s at risk for hemorrhage. And that tissue that does not pass out has to be removed surgically. Even under the prior recommendations, using it up to 10 weeks gestation, about 5-8% of the time it does fail and the woman needs surgery. But in this new world where nobody’s even checking to find out how far along she is, it’s going to fail more frequently.”

For any woman, those are inhumane odds. For a woman trapped in a life of sex abuse, it’s a death sentence. The idea that anyone — let alone the leader of the free world — would try to push this poison on innocent mothers and children is abhorrent. What he’s telling the desperate, hurting girls like Darlene is that there’s no way out. That there is no safe place. “Women who are in this situation,” she tells people now, “need healing. They need guidance, they need compassion. But they don’t need abortion.”

She should know. The night Darlene begged her captor for her baby’s life, she had a dream — of a little face, part of a hand “with those distinct stubby fingers,” part of a ribcage. Looking back, she knows it was supernatural, a window into a womb she didn’t know. She woke up, raised her arms in the air in an act of desperation, and said, “God, if you’re real, I need you to show up.” He did, hatching a plan for her to escape with the help of a social worker assigned to track her as a runaway. She faked her abortion and found her freedom.

Darlene was saved by heroes — people who valued her life and her baby’s. Girls everywhere deserve a government and a president who does the same.

AUTHOR

Tony Perkins

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC column appeared in The Washington Stand is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Prominent Pro-Abortion Group Appears To Be Front For Radical Revolutionary Communists

/in , , , , , , , , /by

A prominent pro-abortion activist group downplaying its association with the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) shares significant infrastructure and leadership with the radical outfit’s other offshoot groups, a Daily Caller analysis has found.

Although RiseUp4AbortionRights seems like most other pro-abortion groups at first glance, other pro-abortion activists released a statement in late June asserting that RiseUp is a front for a “pyramid scheme” and cult of personality. The Daily Caller’s examination of the organization’s leaders, online presence, and fundraising platforms lend credence to the claim that RiseUp is an offshoot front group for the RCP.

“Support for communism in the U.S. is incredibly low, so one way for these individuals to jump-start is to ride the coattails of something that has much more acceptability” in mainstream discussion of current political events, Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, told the Daily Caller.

RiseUp shares leadership with the RCP and several of its related organizations. Sunsara Taylor is a prominent RCP spokeswoman and a co-founder of RiseUp. Taylor founded RiseUp in January 2022 to protest for “abortion on demand and without apology.” An earlier pro-abortion group Taylor founded, Stop Patriarchy, used the same slogan and also attracted scrutiny from other pro-abortion activist organizations, the Austin Chronicle reported in 2014. Stop Patriarchy has not posted any new tweets to its Twitter feed since 2020, but the organization’s website features more recent footage of an interview in which Taylor discusses the consequences of the Dobbs decision.

Taylor also founded The World Can’t Wait, Inc., (TWCW) alongside another RCP devotee in 2006 to oppose the Bush administration, particularly its policies in the Middle East.

Taylor went on to co-found another organization, Refuse Fascism, in 2016 to resist the incoming Trump administration. At the time, the RCP took credit for helping create Refuse Fascism on its website. The “what you can do now” quick links section at the bottom of the RCP website still links directly to the Refuse Fascism homepage.

Another leading RiseUp activist, Sam Goldman, is a prominent spokeswoman for Refuse Fascism. In a Jan. 2022 episode of the Refuse Fascism podcast featured on the organization’s website, Goldman stated that she has “been busy helping launch RiseUp4AbortionRights.”

The RCP website promotes digital content from RiseUp and Refuse Fascism. Similarly, Refuse Fascism’s website features digital content from RiseUp and the RCP. All three organizations generally promote each others’ digital content on their websites without making clear the nature of their association.

On its main fundraising portal, RiseUp states that it is sharing certain “tools” with Refuse Fascism until RiseUp “establishes infrastructure” for fundraising of its own. RiseUp’s PayPal fundraising account also includes the name of TWCW. Refuse Fascism and TWCW share a New York City mailing address.

RiseUp’s website claims that the group spends donated funds on protest materials and logistics. Amid accusations of financial impropriety from other pro-abortion groups, RiseUp released a statement promising that it “has never used any funds it has raised for any purposes other than exactly what the funds were raised for.”

The RiseUp statement derided criticism of Taylor and Avakian as “scurrilous and false.” The RCP added that the accusations from other pro-abortion groups “smack strongly of the tactics of the right wing fascist forces in this country and the political police (the FBI, etc.) who create pretexts to go after revolutionary groups” in its own statement. The RCP flatly denied ever having used RiseUp funds in any capacity in its statement.

Taylor refused to say if RiseUp would submit to an independent audit of its financial dealings in order to clear up the accusations, and referred the Daily Caller to previous statements on the matter. Neither RiseUp nor the RCP disclosed documentation in response statements to definitively disprove the allegations of impropriety.

VIEW THEIR INSTAGRAM PAGE HERE

The RCP centers on Avakian’s revolutionary ideology, which RCP materials refer to as “new communism.” Critics, including those who signed the June statement against RiseUp, have claimed that the RCP is a Maoist group that elevates Avakian and his teachings as messianic. The late June statement from pro-abortion groups opposed to RiseUp asserted that the RCP established RiseUp as a front to divert funds and people towards the growth of its ideology rather than earnestly supporting the pro-abortion cause.

“There will be individuals who use this division and deep and wide disappointment with the Dobbs decision to not only stake claim with regard to abortion rights, but also to make their overall failed political worldview an attractive option” to naive demonstrators, Levin said.

RiseUp has become one of the most visible pro-abortion groups in the United States. Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez joined RiseUp demonstrators in protest the day of the release of Dobbs. Taylor held a megaphone to Ocasio-Cortez’s face while the congresswoman led chants calling the Supreme Court illegitimate. Several protesters, including Taylor, have been spotted and photographed wearing RCP merchandise at RiseUp demonstrations.

The group has appeared at many demonstrations across the country since its inception, and has received attention from the press and celebrities. Hillary Clinton promoted a RiseUp protest on Twitter in early May. Hollywood social justice warriors Mark Ruffalo and Rosanna Arquette have publicly supported RiseUp, according to its website. MSNBC even broadcast an interview with two young RiseUp activists.

RiseUp protesters deploy unique tactics, including smearing red paint over their private parts. They also paint green handprints over the chests of protesters wearing white. Doing so represents “a facsimile of what would happen to actual living women, hemorrhaging to death from unsafe abortions,” one RiseUp activist explained to the Daily Caller at a recent protest in front of the Supreme Court.

“These are opportunists who are trying to take advantage of people of good will who have deeply held, sincere beliefs with regard to the right to abortion,” Levin concluded.

None of the signatories of the statement in opposition to RCP that were contacted returned the Daily Caller’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

NICHOLAS POPE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pro-Life Groups Sound The Alarm Over Repeated Attacks, Call Out FBI, DOJ For Not Doing Enough

School District: Berkeley Riot Organizers Tried To ‘Brainwash’ Students Into Left-Wing Activism [VIDEO]

Why A Famed Liberal Scholar Is ‘Running Screaming From The Left’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Buttigieg Defends Harassing Conservative Justices Over Abortion

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

It’s never an insurrection when your side is the one doing it. Just ask good ol’ Mayor Pete.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Sunday defended protesters against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh who gathered earlier this week outside Morton’s steakhouse, where he was eating dinner.

Buttigieg’s boyfriend, Chasten, tweeted in response to the news: “Sounds like he just wanted some privacy to make his own dining decisions,” a shot toward Kavanaugh’s vote to overturn Roe v. Wade last month, ending a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

During an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” moderator Mike Emanuel asked Buttigieg if his Chasten’s tweet about the incident was “appropriate.”

“Look, when public officials go into public life, we should expect two things. One, that you should always be free from violence, harassment, and intimidation,” Buttigieg replied. “And two, you’re never going to be free from criticism or peaceful protest, people exercising their First Amendment rights.”

Speaking out is a First Amendment right. Harassing people in their private life isn’t. There’s a huge difference between protesting outside the Supreme Court, and outside the homes and private gatherings of individuals.

Buttigieg isn’t very bright, despite trying to make that into his brand, but he knows the difference quite well and is being disingenuous when he pretends that he doesn’t.

“So, yes, people are upset,” Buttigieg concluded. “They’re going to exercise their First Amendment rights.”

If they were exercising “their First Amendment rights” outside Sotomayor’s cafe, the conversation would be quite different.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

RELATED ARTICLES:

Leftist Group Offers Venmo Payments to Harass Supreme Court Justices

France: Afghan Muslim migrant guilty of rape, says ‘In my country, it is normal to have sex with young boys’

Germany: Teacher tries to stop forced marriages, is told by the victims ‘That’s the way things are in Islam’

Biden thanks CIA for warning of Putin’s plans to invade Ukraine, Russian TV mocks: ‘Biden is of course our agent’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

New York’s Dem Governor Urges Biden To Use Military Bases For Abortions

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul on Friday urged the Biden administration to consider opening up military bases for abortions to women living in states that heavily restrict the procedure, ABC News reported.

Since military bases are considered federal lands, Hochul argued in a virtual meeting with President Joe Biden that federal law would allow them to override state bans, according to ABC. Her suggestion heeds widespread outcries from  Democratic politicians about loss of women’s rights following the Supreme Court’s decision on June 24 overturning Roe V. Wade.

“Veterans hospitals, military bases and other places where the federal government controls the jurisdiction in some of the states that are hostile to women’s rights” could “make sure that those services can be available to other women” not publicly employed, Hochul said, according to ABC.

Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, also in the meeting, floated the idea of using Indian Health Service clinics and tribal territory, where state law does not govern, as alternatives to private abortion facilities, ABC reported.

Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren stated that the U.S. government should plant abortion facilities on the outskirts of national parks on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” Sunday and in a Washington Post interview Monday.

Health and Human Services secretary Xavier Becerra said Tuesday that “every option is on the table” regarding abortion access, but the agency would “have a conversation with the president to make sure we implement his directives”

The White House, while agreeing with the Democratic leaders on the supposed need for comprehensive reproductive healthcare availability for all, said on Tuesday putting abortion centers on government-owned property could have “dangerous ramifications.”

Currently, however, federal facilities, including military bases, can only perform abortions in the case of rape, incest or where the life of the mother is in danger due to the Hyde Amendment, which prevents taxpayer dollars from funding elective abortions.

The House Appropriations Committee approved amendments to the fiscal year 2023 funding bill Thursday that would repeal the Hyde Amendment, allowing federal medical centers to perform abortions to the degree Congress decides, according to a press release.

“The bill eliminates the Hyde and Weldon amendments, a long-standing discriminatory policy that denied low-income women their legal right to an abortion,” the bill summary stated.

Hochul’s office and the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies did not respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Just Days After Roe Reversal, Abortion Is Already Banned In Almost A Quarter Of America

ESPN’s Elle Duncan Pushes Fathers To Be Pro-Abortion To Support Their Daughters

‘We Need Two More Votes’: Biden Calls Out Manchin And Sinema For Not Rolling Over On Filibuster

‘All They Do Is Virtue Signal’: Daily Caller’s Kay Smythe Says Politicians Are ‘Failed Actors’ Seeking Popularity

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Why Do The Woke Hate Clarence Thomas So Much?

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Justice Clarence Thomas, being African American, is seen as a traitor to the woke cause.

After the overturning of Roe v Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas has been a particular target of venomous attack from the woke mob. Why do they hate him so much? One might be forgiven for thinking that it is due to his staunch anti-abortion views. But that explanation does not work.

Pope Francis has long expressed that opposing abortion is “closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right”, and yet, the Left is not obsessed with him (in fact, many even take a liking). At some point, even Joe Biden supported letting States overturn Roe v Wade, and again, the Left did not go ballistic on him.

Not behaving as expected

So, why the animus against Thomas? There can only be one explanation: race. In 1991, as he was accused of sexually harassing Anita Hill, Thomas countered that he was the victim of “a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.”

This was loose talk, as it trivialised the suffering of real lynching victims in America’s troubled history of race relations. But Thomas did have a point in arguing that in the United States, any black person who dares to deviate from the official narrative of how blacks are supposed to act, will face severe harassment.

In 1991, he anticipated a trend that would become mainstream in our times: if you are born with a particular skin colour, you are supposed to behave in a certain way, and uphold a specific ideology. If not, you are a race traitor. As Biden so neatly phrased it:

“[I]f you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Any competent scholar of the history of racism would immediately recognise this as race essentialism. As Angelo Corlett explains in his book Race, Racism and Reparations,
“proponents of race essentialism define human races by a set of genetic or cultural traits shared by all members of a ‘racial’ group.”

Who are the neo-Nazis now?

In the first half of the 20th Century, this view was popular amongst proponents of so-called “racial science”. They believed that racial biological traits determine how people behave. Hitler believed that no matter how much a person with Jewish ancestry tried to assimilate to German society (even converting to another religion), he or she would still be a dangerous Jew, because it was in his or her essence.

Race essentialism is abhorrent, and one might think that after 1945, the world learned a lesson. And yet, race essentialism is alive and kicking, but this time, under the guise of woke progressivism. As per today’s woke rules, if you are black, you must embrace the whole woke mindset.

White people (such as Pope Francis) may occasionally be forgiven for having anti-abortion views, but if you are black and you deviate from the woke line (such as Clarence Thomas), you are a race traitor, an Uncle Tom. Unsurprisingly, Thomas has been called “Uncle Clarence” multiple times.

If you are black, not only do you have to act a certain way, but you must also have a special sexual preference. The woke pay lip service to interracial relationships, but amongst them there is a sense of unease when they contemplate a successful black man marrying a white woman.

For example, when Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States, USA Today columnist Barbara Reynolds wrote: “Here’s a man who’s going to decide crucial issues for the country and he has already said no to blacks; he has already said if he can’t paint himself white he’ll think white and marry a white woman.” Russell Adams, chairman of African American studies at Howard University, said that Thomas “marrying a white woman is a sign of his rejection of the black community.”

Truly racist

Frantz Fanon is a figure beloved by the Left. In 1952, he published Black Skin, White Masks, a canonical text of wokeness. In that book, he also scorns black men who fall in love with white women. Fanon castigates himself for, at some point, having had these thoughts: “Out of the blackest part of my soul, across the zebra striping of my mind, surges this desire to be suddenly white. I wish to be acknowledged not as black but as white… I marry white culture, white beauty, white whiteness.” The implication of this passage is that loving a white woman is an act of racial treason.

Fanon felt disdain for black people who embraced Western values. He claimed they were wearing white masks, as if somehow, they were deviating from their real essence, and were therefore living an inauthentic life. Therefore — so Fanon believed — Western civilisation must be rejected entirely. As he explained in The Wretched of the Earth, “When the colonized hear a speech on Western culture, they draw their machetes or at least check to see they are close to hand.” He who admires Western values is a sellout.

Ever since Fanon, racial essentialism in the name of progress has only grown worse. People of color are now encouraged not to honour punctuality, because being on time is part of whiteness. Black kids who are academically talented run the risk of being told they are “acting white”. Analysing things objectively is an act of white supremacy. And so on.

Consequently, Clarence Thomas is not allowed to have anti-abortion views. Nobody cares about his anti-abortion arguments, because he is not supposed to make them in the first place. Other jurists, philosophers or theologians will be allowed to oppose abortion, but only if they are white. Thomas is hated not because of his views, but because of his skin colour. He upsets the arbitrary racial classifications that the woke are so eager to embrace.

As per woke taxonomy, black people cannot be conservative, and if they are, they are only wearing a “white mask”. To paraphrase the late Christopher Hitchens, “identity politics poisons everything”. We can no longer have a meaningful discussion about anything as vital as the ontological status of a fetus, because the race of the discussants will determine who is allowed to uphold a particular view. It’s time to push back against this madness.

AUTHOR

Gabriel Andrade

Gabriel Andrade is a university professor originally from Venezuela. He writes about politics, philosophy, history, religion and psychology. More by Gabriel Andrade

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

POLL: Inflation, Economy And Crime Still More Important Than Abortion To Voters Post-Dobbs

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Voters still rank economic concerns and rising crime higher in importance than abortion even after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a Cygnal study released Wednesday found.

The most important issues to voters polled were the high cost of living/inflation, the economy in general and crime/violence. A full 62% of voters ranked these issues as the most important to them.

Only eight percent said abortion was the most important issue to them.

The study had a margin of error of 2.19%. Cygnal interviewed registered voters via online panel, and the poll was conducted through June 25 and 26 and surveyed over 2,000 voters. Cygnal has a B+ rating according to FiveThirtyEight and has predicted 95% of races correctly.

Among independents, high cost of living/inflation, economy in general and jobs were top concerns, with 60% of independent voters ranking them as the most important issues to them. Comparatively, 20% of independent voters ranked abortion as the most important issue to them.

According to the poll, voters seem to have a slight preference for Republicans candidates over Democrat candidates heading into the midterms. Of those surveyed, 48% said they would prefer a Republican candidate and 44% said they would prefer a Democratic candidate.

The polling also showed Republicans leading as the party most trusted to handle economic issues. Republicans are trusted to handle the high cost of living and inflation, for instance, at a rate of 51%, compared to 49% who trusted them in a January poll. The percentage of voters who trusted Democrats to handle those issues remained steady from January, at 39%.

“Friday’s decision did nothing to change the headwinds state Democrats will face this year as a result of a dismal national political environment,” the Republican State Leadership Committee said of the polling numbers.

AUTHOR

SARAH WEAVER

Staff writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

HART: Dems’ Dearth Of Ideas Spawns Weaponization Of Government Against Opponents

The Internet Drags Biden For Claim About The ‘Ultra-MAGA’ Agenda

AMERICAN PRIDE ON THE SLIDE: Record-Low 38% ‘Extremely Proud’ to Be American

Poll Shows How Much The Trimester Affects Support For Abortion

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Here’s Why The Government Can’t Set Up Abortion Clinics On Federal Land

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Despite demands from several prominent Democrats, the federal government is prohibited from using taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.

The Hyde Amendment, first included in federal appropriations bills in 1976, prohibits the federal government from funding abortions unless “the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.” Activists estimate that the Hyde Amendment prevents at least 60,000 abortions every year.

The amendment is named for Republican Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee who championed it.

Although support for the amendment was initially bipartisan, Democrats in recent years have attempted to pass federal budgets that do not include the provision. President Joe Biden flip-flopped on support for the amendment during his 2020 presidential campaign, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi attempted to jettison the provision for an early COVID-19 relief package. Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s demand that the Hyde Amendment be included in a social spending package was a key factor in the breakdown in Build Back Better negotiations.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, several Republican-controlled states instituted trigger laws limiting abortion. In response, prominent left-wing Democrats urged the Biden administration to take actions to protect abortion access in those states.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren both called on the federal government to make abortions available on federal lands like national parks, where state governments could not regulate the procedure.

Warren and Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith claimed in a New York Times op-ed that Biden could provide “federal resources for individuals seeking abortion care in other states” and use “federal property and resources to protect people seeking abortion services locally.” Warren also claimed that the administration could designate “federal lands as a place where abortions can occur.”

Ocasio-Cortez added that providing abortion services on federal lands is the “the babiest of the babiest of the baby steps” that the federal government can take.

Neither Warren nor Ocasio-Cortez responded to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on whether or not they believe that such actions would violate the Hyde Amendment.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rejected the congressional Democrats’ suggestion Monday, but two cabinet members did suggest that they would use their agencies to promote abortion access.

“Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a Friday statement shortly after the ruling. “I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force.”

“The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law,” he added.

When contacted for comment, a Department of Defense (DOD) spokesperson cited a memorandum released Tuesday by Undersecretary of Defense Gilbert Cisneros. The memorandum stressed that the DOD will comply with the conditions laid out by the Hyde Amendment, and “will continue to follow existing departmental policy.”

Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra promised to “increase access” to abortifacients, claiming that his agency has been planning for “every action necessary to protect women’s access to reproductive healthcare.”

A spokesperson for HHS did not respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on compliance with the Hyde Amendment.

AUTHOR

MICHAEL GINSBERG

Congressional reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: 48 Senate Republicans Tell Schumer They Will Block Any Bill Undermining Hyde Amendment

‘Simply Ignore’: Military Expert Sounds Alarm On Pentagon’s Abortion Stance

New York Attorney General Demands Google Scrub Crisis Pregnancy Centers From Search Results

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Just Days After Roe Reversal, Abortion Is Already Banned In Almost A Quarter Of America

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Barely more than 72 hours after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, abortion is already illegal in roughly one-quarter of the states in America.

A number of Republican-controlled states have had “trigger” laws activated, which are laws put in place to impose restrictions on abortion in the event the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade. Others have moved to enact new abortion restrictions, with some banning the practice entirely.

Abortion is now outlawed in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Ohio, South Carolina, Texas and Tennessee have enacted six-week bans, and the others have fully banned abortion, according to NPR.

Other states are poised to follow suit in the near future. Republican North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley announced Tuesday that his office had certified the overturning of Roe, and the state’s abortion ban will go into effect July 28. Republican Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds is asking courts to lift an injunction holding up the state’s heartbeat abortion ban.

“Trigger” laws are currently pending in several more states, including Idaho, Mississippi and Wyoming, and Georgia’s six-week ban is currently subject to an injunction.

Analysts expect roughly half the states in America could ultimately ban abortion entirely, or come close to doing so, now that Roe has been overturned, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Democrats have been scrambling to find ways to maintain abortion access, and no blue states have so far implemented any new restrictions.

AUTHOR

DYLAN HOUSMAN

Healthcare reporter. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

White House Encourages Girls ‘15 Or Younger’ To Abort Without Their Parents’ Consent

These Companies Are Promising To Pay For Their Employees’ Abortions After SCOTUS Decision

Judge Blocks Texas Trigger Law From Going Into Effect, Rules Abortions Can Proceed

Army Chaplain Under Investigation For Sending Pro-Life Message To Troops

‘A Lot Cheaper To Get Rid Of Them’: Tucker Carlson Says Corporations Are Telling People They Can’t Have Children

SCOTUS ‘Assassination Challenge’ Pushed By Trans Creator Of ‘Gender Unicorn’ Graphic

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Pro-Abortion Protest Turns Violent: Lawmakers ‘Held Hostage’ In Arizona Capitol

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Lawmakers were instructed not to exit the Arizona state capitol as protestors gathering outside the building created a “hostage” situation late Friday night into early Saturday morning.

“Violent anti-abortion protestors attempts of an insurrection at the Arizona State Senate were thwarted Friday night, thanks to the swift action from local and state law enforcement,” the Arizona State Senate said in a press release.

“Protesters threatened to break the AZ Senate entryway glass,” Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers tweeted.

Police used tear gas to disperse the protestors and regain control of the building, according to Fox News.

“We are currently there being held hostage inside the Senate building due to members of the public trying to breach our security,” State Senator Kelly Townsend wrote on Twitter. 

State Senator Warren Peterson said several of his fellow Senators were armed.

One Senator compared the violence to the breach of the United States Capitol that occurred on January 6, 2021.

“I expect a J24 committee to be created immediately,” she said on Twitter.

“Extremist demonstrators made their way to the entrance of the Senate building and began forcibly trying to make entry by breaking down windows and pushing down doors,” according to the Arizona State Senate press release.

According to the press release, the air circulation system in the building pulled the tear gas deployed on the demonstrators into the Senate chambers, preventing lawmakers from returning to the Senate floor.

“Senate proceedings were moved to another room in the building.”

Senate President Karen Fann thanked law enforcement for responding quickly to the situation.

“We are incredibly thankful for our local law enforcement who quickly intervened during what could have been a destructive and dangerous situation for our members, staff and public inside the Senate,” Fann said.

AUTHOR

SARAH WEAVER

Staff writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Attempts To Incite People Into ‘The Streets’ Outside Supreme Court

‘What Other Judicial Outrage Must We Endure?’: Dems Call For Expanding SCOTUS After String Of Losses

Democratic Candidates Waste No Time Begging For Money Off Dobbs Decision

‘Horrifying Decision’: Democrats Lose Their Minds After Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Rights

Tyrant Justin Trudeau Weeps Over US Women ‘Losing’ the Right Over Their Bodies — After Forcing Every Person in Canada to Receive Experimental Vaccine

RELATED VIDEO: Day 1 of the Abortionist Insurrection

RELATED TWEET: Day 1 of the Abortionist Insurrection – Democrat Leaders Lead Calls for Mass Violence, Violent Mobs Terrorize Communities, Crack Heads

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Squad’ Democrats Vote Against Security For SCOTUS Justices After Spending Small Fortunes On Private Security

/in , , , , , , , /by

Democratic “Squad” members in the House voted against a bill Tuesday extending security for Supreme Court Justices despite spending a combined six figures on private security in 2021, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records and House Disbursements.

Missouri Rep. Cori Bush, Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley, Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, as well as New York Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jamaal Bowman are among the 27 Democratic members who voted against the approved security measure. Still, these lawmakers spent roughly $348,000 on private security in 2021.

The legislation comes as Republican-appointed justices get targeted by pro-abortion demonstrators after a leaked draft opinion showed the Court will likely overturn the landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade. It passed in the Senate unanimously over a month ago and was introduced by Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Democratic Delaware Sen. Chris Coons.

Bush, who has frequently called to “defund” the police, spent roughly $200,000 in campaign funds on security in 2021, Fox News reported. Ocasio-Cortez, who indicated she would not support the security bill since she is prioritizing gun control legislation, spent roughly $75,000 on private security in 2021, the outlet reported.

Pressley, who spent $14,000 from her Member Representational Allowance (MRA) in 2022 on security, spent roughly $63,000 of her MRA on security between May and December 2021, The Daily Caller reported. Tlaib spent under $3,000 on security in 2021 and Bowman spent more than $7,800 in 2021, Fox News reported.

“The lack of concern bordering on hatred for the families of the six judges appointed by Republican presidents is scary,” Republican Wisconsin Rep. Glenn Grothman told TheDCNF. “I can never imagine something so callous and uncaring being done if the shoe was on the other foot.”

Offices for Bush, Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez and Bowman did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesman for Pressley declined The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment and pointed to the member’s remarks after her vote claiming the Supreme Court has “put lives at risk,” alluding to the leaked draft opinion.

“While elected and appointed officials, including Members of Congress and Supreme Court Justices, do in fact already have protections when it comes to their security, abortion care providers and patients—who already face and will undoubtedly face persistent threats of violence and criminalization should Roe fall—do not,” said Pressley, the Boston Herard reported.

On May 5, a left-wing group called “Ruth Sent Us” leaked the addresses of the six Republican-appointed justices. The group, one of the several pro-abortion groups that published the addresses of the justices, claimed Monday it was not responsible for the attempted murder of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh since the man charged was white.

That man, Nicholas Roske, was arrested and charged last week after police spotted him outside Kavanaugh’s home with weapons, including a firearm.

AUTHOR

GABE KAMINSKY

Investigative reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Are Democrats Willing to Assassinate a SCOTUS to Appoint a Liberal Judge?

‘The Squad’ Pushes To ‘Defund The Police’ While Spending Thousands On Private Security To Protect Themselves

Arsonists Firebomb Pro-Life Legislator’s Office In Latest Attack

Biden Approval Rating Drops. Again

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.