Despite Georgia Victories Congressional Democrats Have Limited Options on Abortion

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

Will Joe Pee Pads Biden do an end run around Congress on abortion?

I have a feeling we will see a lot of Executive Orders/Actions to push abortion.

Joe Pee Pads Biden claims to be a good Catholic yet he advocates the murder of babies via abortion.

He better go to Proverbs and see what God says about shedding innocent bloot it goes like this.

 

16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood.

You can not get more innocent blood than that of a baby.

Biden poised to take executive action, get cabinet picks confirmed despite Republican opposition.

Despite unified control of both chambers of Congress and the presidency, congressional Democrats’ narrow majorities will make lasting legislative victories on abortion difficult to attain, likely leaving President-elect Joe Biden to resort to executive actions.

Victories in both of the runoff elections in Georgia have given Senate Democrats a 50-50 split in the Senate with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris (D.) in a position to cast a tie-breaking vote. The party’s 2020 platform vowed to restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood; repeal the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion; and overturn federal and state laws restricting access to abortion or other “reproductive health and rights.”

But West Virginia senator Joe Manchin (D.) pledged to thwart any legislative attempts to institute taxpayer funding of abortion.

“As a life-long Catholic, I have always been pro-life and believe that the Hyde Amendment ensures federal funds are not used to perform abortions anywhere in the country,” Manchin told the Washington Free Beacon. “Repealing the Hyde Amendment would be foolish and I’m strongly opposed to this push from some Members of Congress. If this legislation is brought before the Senate I will vote against repealing the Hyde Amendment.”

Despite the promise of legislative gridlock, however, the Biden administration is poised to undo the Trump administration’s anti-abortion policies through executive action. According to Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America, the most significant impact of Democratic control of the Senate may be cementing the confirmation of Xavier Becerra as Department of Health and Human Services secretary.

“It’s not a good pick for moderation and bringing people together,” Day said. “He’s a very extreme abortion advocate. That would be very dangerous on a federal level.”

Becerra has already come under fire from pro-life advocates for his record of targeting anti-abortion activists and opposition to religious-conscience rights. A Republican-majority Senate could have blocked his nomination on a party-line vote, but they will need to get at least one Democrat to oppose him.

As attorney general of California, Becerra prosecuted anti-abortion activists and defended an unconstitutional law that would have required crisis pregnancy centers to advertise abortion services. He is also likely to follow through on Biden’s pledge to revive the Little Sisters of the Poor legal battle, since he cosponsored legislation in 2007 that would have eliminated religious-conscience objections to contraceptive coverage mandates.

Biden will also be able to use executive actions to reverse anti-abortion policies like the Mexico City policy, which prohibits the use of taxpayer money to support foreign nongovernmental organizations that provide abortion services or recommendations.

“Biden has completed his flip-flop on abortion,” David O’Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee, told the Free Beacon. “I expect he will issue executive orders that are very harmful to the pro-life cause.”

O’Steen said he expects most, if not all, of the Trump administration’s executive orders on abortion, such as reinstating the Mexico City policy and changing Title X funding to effectively remove Planned Parenthood from accessing Medicaid funds, to be rescinded by the Biden administration.

Day expressed optimism that another moderate Democrat, Sen. Bob Casey (D., Pa.), could join Manchin in protecting the Hyde Amendment. Casey’s track record on the issue is mixed, as he has supported the Hyde Amendment but also favored taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood.

Day said Democratic extremism on abortion and interest-group pressure could push the party far beyond where the majority of public opinion stands.

“We have pro-life Democrats who voted for Biden,” Day said. “They need to go back to the Biden administration and say, ‘We supported you and we want Hyde to stay in place, we want the conscience protections for workers to not be involved in abortions.’ Those are two very reasonable asks.”

Still, with Biden reversing his long-term stances on abortion issues and nominating Becerra, he will be able to take executive and regulatory action that will not require congressional action.

“Everything is at risk right now. I don’t think any abortion policy is safe,” Day said.

Activists Already Licking Their Chops at Getting Taxpayers To Pay for Abortions Amid Potential Biden Admin

H/T Western Journal.

Here is what is in God’s word about shedding innocent blood and you can not get more innocent blood that that of a baby.

The Hyde Amendment needs to be kept in place.

 

16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

 

Pro-choice advocates often have appealed to moral relativism to support their position on abortion, asserting that everyone has a right to decide how they feel on the issue, and pro-life people have no right to impose their beliefs on others.

Not only does this not address the argument that abortion intentionally kills an innocent human being, but what’s interesting is that the pro-choice movement increasingly has begun to engage in the thinking they claim to condemn by pushing for taxpayer funding of abortions.

The Hyde Amendment prevents federal tax dollars from funding most abortions, but as seen at a hearing held Tuesday by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, many pro-choice activists have set their sights on having it overturned.

As The Associated Press reported, presumptive president-elect Joe Biden says he supports repeal of the Hyde Amendment and would appoint pro-abortion politicians to major positions in his administration.

Which means pro-choice advocates might get their wish when it comes to forcing taxpayer money to go toward abortions.

At the hearing, titled “The Impact on Women Seeking an Abortion but are Denied Because of an Inability to Pay,” representatives from various abortion advocacy groups levied false claims against the Hyde Amendment to support their position.

Their arguments against the amendment relied on assumptions, as the measure has saved more than 2 million lives, according to the Charlotte Lozier Institute, protecting women in difficult situations from feeling as if abortion is their only option.

Still, pro-choice advocates such as Herminia Palacio — president and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, a former “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood, according to Live Action — see the Hyde Amendment as a barrier to abortion.

The harmful burdens of the Hyde Amendment are intentionally and unjustly imposed on black or brown people, and on people with low incomes,” Palacio said to the committee. “In other words, on people who have been historically marginalized.”

Palacio asserted that for this reason, “The Hyde Amendment is a racist policy,” but there are several problems with her argument.

The most obvious problem is that the issue of women facing challenges to accessing an abortion does not prove these restrictions are wrong, unless Palacio can demonstrate that abortion does not take the life of an innocent human being.

It also is difficult to connect the abortion industry to any form of racial justice.

A recent letter signed by hundreds of past and current Planned Parenthood of Greater New York employees confronted the organization’s long history of racism and eugenics. And Buzzfeed News reviewed an internal audit of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America conducted this year that concluded PPFA’s treatment of black employees “does not line up with its social justice-driven mission.”

Also, while Palacio pointed to the coalition of people she claimed needed access to abortions, she did not address the wide spectrum of Americans who are opposed to using federal funds to pay for them.

2016 YouGov poll found 55 percent of Americans support the Hyde Amendment, including 41 percent of Democrats, 56 percent of independents and 73 percent of Republicans.

The poll surveyed 1,000 respondents through web-based interviews, weighing scores based on gender, age, race, education, political ideology, geographic region and voter registration and containing a margin of error of + or – 4.8 percentage points.

But perhaps what’s most interesting about these claims about public funding being necessary to help poor women afford abortions is what the abortion industry stands to gain financially if abortions are subsidized by taxpayers.

While the Hyde Amendment prohibits taxpayer funding of most abortions at the federal level, an analysis by Live Action showed how the abortion industry often profits from taxpayer dollars at the state level.

In each example, the more that taxpayer funding for abortions increased, so did the number of abortions being performed, meaning the abortion industry has a financial conflict of interest when it comes to repealing the Hyde Amendment.

The irony is that the same industry that’s arguing the procedure is too expensive for low-income women is the one that’s setting the price for an abortion.

It’s also worth noting that a separate report from Live Action estimated the cost of the abortion pill averages under $100, but the abortion industry sells it to clients at nearly six times the cost.

Guttmacher and other abortion advocacy groups claim repealing the Hyde Amendment would help women, but they’re silent on the way the industry has wrongfully been profiting from women.

Shifting the burden of cost to taxpayers without any regard to their views on abortion, all while allowing the industry to continue gaining financially from women, is unethical

Mothers who are not prepared for a child deserve access to care and support, something the thousands of pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) throughout the country are willing to provide.

A 2019 report Charlotte Lozier Institute found PRCs provided nearly 2 million people in the United States with free services, and prior research from the same organization in 2017 found PRCs actually save communities at least $161 million annually.

Instead of imposing a specific viewpoint on the public — something pro-choice activists claim to be against — allocating resources toward alleviating the financial burdens of women seems like a more viable alternative.

Let’s Give Red Flag Laws a Try, with Abortion

H/T Town Hall.

Proponents of abortion would not stand still for abortion red flag laws.

Proponents of the Second Amendment should not stand still on red flag laws either.

When you have to ask for a right, it ceases to be a right and becomes a privilege. And privileges, like freedom, can be taken away. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and it cannot, constitutionally, be taken away. So-called red flag laws are an attempt to do just that, demote the “right” of the people to bear arms to a mere privilege. Championed by left-wing politicos who would prefer we view the Bill of Rights, not as a sacrosanct guarantee of individual liberty, but rather an à la carte menu of daily preferences, red flag laws are, although often well-intentioned, ill-conceived reactionary surrenders of our Constitutional liberty. It would be both curious and dangerous to see exactly how many other “rights” and liberties they truly believe are subject to such daily whims.

Red flag laws allow individual judges to issue orders allowing law enforcement to seize firearms from American citizens, not on the basis of any committed crime, but rather, based solely on the beliefs of others. Red flag laws allow for ex-parte hearings, that is, proceedings without the accused even being present to defend him or herself. Red flag laws require the accused to appear before a court, after an order has been issued, and make an argument in defense of their rights. The accused must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of a judge who may or may not be friendly to 2nd Amendment rights, that they should be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights. Most importantly, red flag laws are ripe for abuse in any number of fashions. Red flag laws create an undue burden on citizens to prove that they are entitled to exercise their constitutional rights.

This past October, Stephen Nichols, an 84-year-old Korean War veteran, former police officer, and current school crossing guard, was the victim of the flawed fed flag law mentality. Mr. Nichols’ offense? He was overheard, and misquoted, by a waitress in an Oak Bluff, MA, diner. Mr. Nichols, speaking with a friend, complained of the local school’s security officers leaving for coffee while the school children were unattended. Mr. Nichols complained that anybody could “shoot up the school” while security officers took breaks. Subsequently, and on the word of the waitress who overheard his statement, Mr. Nichols had his licensed and registered firearms seized and was immediately fired from his position as a crossing guard. Mr. Nichols had his 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights essentially revoked.

If we assume, for the sake of argument, that Mr. Nichols’ accuser acted in good faith, what does his predicament say about the potential for people acting in bad faith? How many ex-boyfriends, ex-girlfriends, ex-husbands, or ex-wives can easily abuse red flag laws? How many constitutional rights are red flag law proponents willing to submit to arbitrary review by judges? What if red flag laws were applied to other situations of life or death, say abortion? Proponents of red flags laws regarding 2nd Amendment rights argue, absent evidence, that without them someone may die. If we applied the same reasoning to abortion rights, absent red flag laws for abortion, someone will die.

Suppose we apply red flag laws to abortion. Should an ex-boyfriend, ex-husband, parent, or friend be able to petition a judge to halt an abortion? Clearly, the decision to have an abortion is a highly emotional one, would it be so bad for a judge to halt the procedure, just long enough to make sure that the subject woman is acting rationally? Should we allow an ex-boyfriend, ex-husband, parent, or school counselor to make the red flag abortion petition ex-parte? Would pro-choice advocates feel comfortable that a judge hearing the red flag abortion petition could keep his or her personal and political feelings out of the ruling? Would a woman seeking an abortion feel overly burdened by simply having to plead her case to a judge, or would she believe that she does not have to explain exercising her Constitutional rights to anyone? Would a woman feel, in such circumstances, that abortion was no longer a right but a privilege?

Constitutional rights are guaranteed to all citizens. They are not privileges that can be taken away arbitrarily or capriciously. Proponents of red flag gun laws are comfortable with a judge deciding when an individual can exercise his or her 2nd Amendment rights. Would they be equally comfortable with a judge determining the same for abortion rights? Life or death may hang in the balance of both, perhaps the Supreme Court could look at them both. Red flag laws are simply an unconstitutional burden on rights and, as Benjamin Franklin put it, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Clint Eastwood Gives Hollywood the Middle Finger, Will Shoot Movie In Georgia Despite Abortion Boycott

H/T Flag And Cross.

Thank you, Clint Eastwood, for standing up to the Hollywierd whackos and standing up for life at shooting your movies in Georgia.

How about them apples!?

Numerous celebrities have decided to boycott Georgia over their new pro-life bill.

Legendary actor and filmmaker Clint Eastwood couldn’t care less about those blowhards.

He’s going to the Peach State, anyway!

From CNS News:

Despite the boycott of filming in Georgia launched by Hollywood liberals angry over the state’s new pro-life “Heartbeat” law, legendary actor/director Clint Eastwood will be making his latest movie, “The Battle of Richard Jewell,” in Atlanta this summer, reported NBC Charlotte and other media.

“Clint Eastwood will perform new film in Georgia despite abortion bill boycott,” tweeted NBC Charlotte on June 25. The movie is about Richard Jewell, a police officer and security guard who discovered a bomb at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Ga., and saved countless lives. Jewell was initially hailed as a hero and then was viewed as a suspect.

Continued:

The liberal media criticized Jewell relentlessly and essentially practiced “trial by media.” Eventually, however, Jewell was completely exonerated and the real bomber, Eric Rudolph, was captured. Jewell sued NBC, CNN, and the New York Post for libel and won large settlements. His lawyer, L. Lin Wood, is the same lawyer now representing the Covington Catholic kid Nicholas Sandmann in defamation lawsuits against CNN and the Washington Post.

The heartbeat bill in Georgia prohibits abortion once a baby’s heartbeat starts, which is usually six weeks into pregnancy. The bill, signed into law in May, allows exceptions in the cases of rape, incest, or if the mother’s life is at serious risk.

John Cusack has starred in a number of solid Hollywood films over the decades.

However, Cusack now seems more concerned about being remembered as just another anti-Trump Hollywood star.

John is now saying that democracy is dead unless President Trump “rots in prison.”

From Breitbart:

Actor and left-wing activist John Cusack warned that democracy in the United States will not survive unless President Donald Trump is forced to “rot in prison.”

John Cusack

@johncusack

Fuck that pathological liar /criminal https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1106408797533339649 

Julia Ioffe

@juliaioffe

Can we publicize the fact that he cited your father and your friend, Candace Owens, as inspiration? https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1106406797051600897 

254 people are talking about this

John Cusack

@johncusack

Fuck that pathological liar /criminal https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1106408797533339649 

Julia Ioffe

@juliaioffe

Can we publicize the fact that he cited your father and your friend, Candace Owens, as inspiration? https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1106406797051600897 

John Cusack

@johncusack

The only way democracy survives him – is if he rots in prison
Let’s get on with it https://twitter.com/johncusack/status/1106409736025456640 

John Cusack

@johncusack

Fuck that pathological liar /criminal https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1106408797533339649 

404 people are talking about this

Cusack clearly suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome. There’s no way around it.

A person in their sane mind does not wish a duly-elected president sent to prison unless a notable crime has been committed.

In Trump’s case, obviously, nothing bad has been done. Heck, there isn’t even any proof of Russia collusion – not that that would even be a crime.

What a mess.

Of Unborn Sea Turtles and Unborn Human Beings

H/T BarbWire.

We have our priorities out of wack you can murder an unborn baby yet you can not harm an unborn turtle.

Kill an unborn baby you get applauded kill and unborn turtle you go to prison. WTF?

Proverbs 6:16-17 King James Version (KJV)

16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

You can not get any more innocent blood than the blood of a baby.

One of the things the Bible teaches is the total depravity of unredeemed man. “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God” (Romans 3:10). If enough people believe the lies of the devil, eventually their entire culture becomes depraved.

Witness what happened last week in Miami Beach, Florida. There, a 41-year-old woman – her motive is unknown – was spotted stomping on the nest of a sea turtle, and jabbing at it with a wooden stake. She was summarily arrested and charged with the crime of “turtle egg molestation or harassment.”

Sea turtle eggs have been welcomed in life and protected in law since 1973 when they found shelter under the Endangered Species Act. Paradoxically, 1973 was the very same year in which abortion was “legalized” by the infamous Roe v. Wade decision.

A sea turtle egg is an unborn sea turtle. A “fetus” is an unborn human being. Thus, in a monstrous act of utter depravity, unborn sea turtles gained the full legal protection of the law in the same year in which unborn human beings lost theirs.

I do not know what penalties the sea turtle woman faces, but I do know that Planned Parenthood receives $500 million a year, dollars yanked by force from your wallet and mine, to kill unborn babies. They kill these babies by pulling their limbs off one by one while they are in the womb and then disposing of them as medical waste, the moral equivalent of stomping on them and jabbing them with stakes.

Speaking of the sea turtle, the Miami Beach police said, “thankfully, it appears the eggs were not damaged.” The same can’t be said for unborn babies.

This is not at all to say that we should urge people to go around destroying the nests of sea turtles. No, quite the opposite. We shouldn’t stomp on turtle eggs or skewer them with stakes. But we shouldn’t do that to unborn babies either.

If you need one singular illustration of America’s descent into moral darkness, this is it. The bottom line: kill unborn sea turtles, go to jail. Kill unborn babies, get rich.

May God convict us of our cruel inhumanity, reduce us to weeping for our sins, forgive us, renew us, and restore us. In Jesus’ name.

Thanks to Democrats, Most Dangerous Place in America is the Womb

H/T BarbWire.

Proverbs 6:16-17 King James Version (KJV)

16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

You can not get more innocent blood than the blood of a baby.

There is a growing dichotomy in America between right and wrong. There is one sector in America that seems to believe that they do not have to abide by the Constitution, laws or ethics to accomplish whatever they want to do. On the other side are those who try to uphold the Constitution, laws and ethics but are accused and blamed for even the slightest hint of anything wrong by the first side who lives by doing wrong.

I’m not talking about criminals versus law-abiding citizens. Rather, I’m speaking about Democrats and conservatives.

Barack Obama violated the US Constitution when he instructed then Attorney General Eric Holder to not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, a full year before the Supreme Court gutted the act.

Barack Obama violated the US Constitution when he opted to not fully enforce federal immigration laws because only Congress can change a law that originated and was passed by Congress.

Barack Obama violated the US Constitution when he made multiple changes to the Affordable Care Act since it also originated in and was passed by Congress.

Barack Obama violated the US Constitution when he bypassed Congress to free funds and a weapons sale to Egypt’s terrorist regime the Muslim Brotherhood, after Congress had frozen the assets and sale of F-16 fighter jets.

The Obama administration interfered with the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illegal use of a private unsecured email server for official State Department business, which clearly constitutes obstruction of justice.

The list goes on and on, but realize that nothing was done about Obama’s many violations and only now is Trump’s DOJ and some Republicans pursuing the issue of obstruction of justice in the Clinton email issue.

Yet, Democrats and the sewagestream media are busy pointing fingers of blame at President Donald Trump for alleged obstruction of justice and other allegedly illegal and dangerous actions – thus, examples of Democratic hypocrisy.

So, consider this issue.

Democrats are busy declaring their cities, counties and states as sanctuary cities to protect illegal aliens from federal immigration officials. Democrats are intentionally violating federal immigration laws (misdemeanors) and obstructing federal law enforcement officers from performing their duties (felonies).

By protecting illegal aliens, Democrats are ignoring the safety, needs and welfare of the American people. They don’t care that thousands of American citizens are victimized by illegal gang members, criminals and those who are addicted to the illegal drugs that are brought across the border by many illegals.

In fact, consider this hypocrisy – Democrats are complaining about the opioid epidemic and trying to lay all of the blame on the legal pharmaceutical companies while it has been revealed that the Mexican drug trafficking business makes more money than Walmart.

While Democrats are busy violating laws to protect illegal aliens, they are passing laws that allow for the legal murder of babies up to the moment of birth. Not only are they passing laws to keep abortion legal but are adding infanticide to their list of legalities by allowing a baby who was just born to be killed. In New York, they even lit up the Empire State Building to celebrate the passage of the baby murdering law.

I recently saw a statement saying that one of the most dangerous places to be for any human being here in the United States is in the womb.

Additionally, Democrats oppose the death penalty for convicted murderers, saying it is cruel and inhumane, and yet the brutal dismemberment of a living baby is perfectly humane.

The bottom line is that Democrats protect illegal aliens, of which includes criminals, terrorists and violent gang members, along with convicted murderers and then turn around and celebrate their ability to openly murder innocent unborn babies, even at the time of birth.

And these are people that want to run America!

Politics Louisiana abortion law: Fury as Democratic governor says he will sign bill banning terminations into law

H/T Yahoo News.

It is good to see Governor John Bel Edwards(D-LA)standing up for the unborn instead of just wanting to murder them.

Politics

Louisiana abortion law: Fury as Democratic governor says he will sign bill banning terminations into law

Missouri’s last abortion clinic says it may lose its license this week

H/T CBSNews.

It is good to hear Murder Inc AKA Planned Parent Hood maybe going out of business in Missouri.

St. Louis, Missouri — The last remaining abortion clinic in Missouri says it expects to be shut down this week, effectively ending legal abortion in the state.

In a statement Tuesday, Planned Parenthood said Missouri’s health department is “refusing to renew” its annual license to provide abortion in the state. If the license is not renewed by May 31, Missouri would become the first state without a functioning abortion clinic since 1973 when Roe v. Wade was decided.

Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit requesting a restraining order against the state, hoping to restore the license and avoid service disruption. A circuit court judge will hear arguments on Wednesday.

Planned Parenthood would still be able to provide non-abortion health services for women in Missouri.

Planned Parenthood said it plans to sue the state “in order to try to keep serving Missouri women.”

“This is not a drill. This is not a warning. This is a real public health crisis,” said Dr. Leana Wen, president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Lisa Cox, a spokesperson for The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, told CBS News on Tuesday morning via email that Planned Parenthood’s license was “under review,” and did not respond to additional questions.

Representatives for Planned Parenthood told CBS News that the upcoming deadline follows weeks of back-and-forth with state health officials.

On May 20, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services notified Planned Parenthood of three issues that could impact license renewal, according to documents reviewed by CBS News and provided by Planned Parenthood.

On May 22, Planned Parenthood said it would address two of them: adjusting who at the clinic provided the state-mandated counseling and adding an additional pelvic exam for abortion patients.

But it said a third request was out of its control. According to Planned Parenthood, the health department said it was investigating “deficient practices,” and needed to interview seven physicians who provide care at the clinic. Planned Parenthood said it could offer interviews only with two who are its employees. The other five physicians working at the facility are residents in training and not employed by Planned Parenthood, a spokesperson for the clinic said via email on Tuesday. The state has indicated that the result of those interviews could be “board review” in addition to “criminal proceedings,” the spokesperson said. The medical residents declined to be interviewed for the state’s investigation.

In its letter, the Department of Health wrote that it could not “complete our investigation until it interviews the physicians involved in the care provided in the potential deficient practices,” and that “the investigation needs to be completed and any deficiencies resolved before the expiration of [the clinic’s] license on May 31, 2019.”

Dr. Colleen McNicholas, a Planned Parenthood physician in St. Louis, said the agency hasn’t shared details of the investigation or the potential concerns. She expected to be interviewed by the health agency Tuesday afternoon, an apparent compromise from the state, which had initially requested that interviews be conducted in a specific order with other physicians going first.

“We are 100 percent committed to the best care that we can provide for patients. So certainly if there is an issue with the care we’re providing we want to know about it,” she said. “We want to be able to address that. But we can’t do that when we’re being attacked.”

planned-parenthood-clinic-escort-copy.jpg
A clinic escort outside Planned Parenthood in St. Louis, Missouri.CBS NEWS

In 2019, six states — including Missouri — have passed laws banning virtually all abortions. In each case, the laws have not yet been enacted and face court challenges.

But now it appears Missouri would be losing its last clinic as a result of state regulations, not a new law.

Clinics that can’t comply with the regulations may be forced to shut their doors, something that happened to several clinics in Missouri when the state began requiring pelvic exams for medical abortions, a method administered by pill, according to McNicholas.

Although Planned Parenthood, in this year’s negotiations with the state, agreed to administer an extra pelvic exam for surgical abortions, the group wouldn’t budge on pill-administered ones.

“When I say an unnecessary pelvic exam what I mean is that the state is forcing me to put my fingers in somebody’s vagina when it is totally medically irrelevant,” McNicholas said. “That is really bordering on harassment… I am really proud of our clinicians for taking a stand and saying you know we just won’t do that to patients.”

In 2008, Missouri had 5 abortion clinics.

“This a chilling warning for all of us that we are in a public health crisis,” said Dr. Wen in an email to CBS News.

“Today it’s Missouri, tomorrow it could be all of America.”

Abortion-Loving Democrat Party Cancels Fundraiser for Pro-Life Democrat — They are Fully the Party of Death

H/T Godfather Politics.

The pro-abortion DemocRats are driving the pro-life DemocRats from the party just like the leftist DemocRats did the Blue Dog DemocRats.

The Abortion-loving Democrat Party has canceled a fundraiser for a Democrat Congressman who is openly pro-life, proving that the party is 100 percent the party of death.

The cancellation proves that you cannot value human life AND be a Democrat at the same time.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) chairwoman Rep. Cheri Bustos (D., Ill.) canceled a planned fundraiser for fellow Illinois Democrat Rep. Dan Lipinski because he is one of the last Democrats who is openly pro-life.

Bustos bowed to pressure from hate-filled, death-loving progressives who were furious that the party would support anyone who loves babies.

The DCCC chair would not explicitly say that Lipinski’s fundraiser was cancelled because of his pro-life stance, but her other comments pretty much proved that was the case.

According to the Washington Free Beacon:

“I’m proud to have a 100 percent pro-choice voting record and I’m deeply alarmed by the rapidly escalating attacks on women’s access to reproductive care in several states,” Bustos said in a statement released by the DCCC.

“While Congressman Lipinski and I do not agree on women’s reproductive health care, this does not change how I will work as DCCC Chair to protect our big tent Democratic caucus,” she added.

There is other evidence that the party cancelled the fundraiser because Lipinski is pro-life.

WFB added that left-wing activist Marie Newman, who tried and failed to topple Lipinski in the 2018 primaries, stirred the hard-core left-wing against the party for the fundraiser.

During her 2018 campaign, Newman received the endorsement and support of numerous progressive political action committees including EMILY’s List, MoveOn, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. She was quick to criticize Bustos last week when news broke that Bustos would be holding a fundraiser for Lipinski.

“The day after Alabama voted to restrict a woman’s right to choose, it’s shocking the DCCC is fervently supporting a representative who is anti-choice, anti-birth control, and anti-health care for all,” Newman said in a tweet.

After the fundraiser was cancelled, Newman was thrilled.

“It’s wonderful to watch our Democratic party unify over shared values,” Newman tweeted. “Yes, we’re a big tent party, but Rep. Lipinski does not represent the priorities of our community.”

So, let’s recap: The Democrat Party is rejecting one of its own members — who got elected to Congress — because he is not pro-death enough for them and is bowing to the will of a death cult leader — who COULD NOT get elected to Congress.

WALSH: Pro-Abortion Zealots Are Sending Me Death Threats And Wishing Rape On My Children. Here Are The Messages.

H/T BarbWire.

There are some sick hate filled bastards on the left.

I have been outspoken this week (and every other week) in my support of the pro-life position. As I have explained many times, I am opposed to abortion in all cases, at all stages, for any reason, no matter the circumstances or manner of the child’s conception. My reason, as I’ve extensively outlined, is that unborn people are people. All people, in my view, have inherent human rights. The right to life is first and foremost and can only be forfeit if a person becomes an active threat to another person, or commits a particularly heinous and violent crime. Since there can be no such thing as a punitive abortion or abortion in self-defense, all abortion is evil because all abortion kills innocent and defenseless people. That’s my case, and the case of every staunch pro-lifer.

You can disagree with our case but if our “don’t kill people” position sends you into a blind rage, that should tell you something about your own psychological state. Speaking of questionable psychological states, this week I have been inundated with hate mail from abortion supporters who are upset in general about my pro-life views, and in particular that I have the gall to suggest that the children of rape victims should not be executed for the crimes of their fathers. I have also pointed out that rapists use abortion to cover their tracks, which is a documented, self-evident, but apparently completely taboo fact .

Of course, I get hate mail all the time. Anyone who shares their opinions online gets hate mail. I won’t bother sharing the hundreds of messages containing vile, vicious, but unfortunately run-of-the-mill insults directed at me. Instead, I want to show you some of the absurdly and graphically violent messages, not only threatening me, but threatening and wishing death and rape on my wife and small children. Please go to my Twitter to see the screenshots and the names and faces of some of these people. Here are some of the lowlights:

-“I’ll rape your daughter and your wife then you tell me what you wanna do. You piece of shit…”

-“Wish I could punch your dumbass face in you f****n mook I wish rape upon every female in your family so they are FORCED to have a child.”

-“Hope you daughter gets raped g”

-“I hope your wife and daughter are both brutally raped”

-“You f*****g idiot!!!! I hope you get raped up the a**”

-“I hope your dad rapes you so your opinion can be valid”

-“You are a f*****g retard. Wish your mom aborted you… hope your daughters have a million abortions”

-“You are the best reason for abortion I have ever encountered. It is a crime that your mother failed to exercise her right…One can only hope that by some happening that error in judgment is remedied. This is not a threat but a hope, a wish, that you, and all who think like you do, are permanently silenced.”

-“You’re a f*****g piece of s**t. I hope I get to meet you one day and show your face how I feel.”

-“Absolute f*****g idiot tw*t… Abort all three of your already born children.”

-“Well you are the exact reason for abortion… feel bad for your kids they are going to turn out like scum just like their dad.”

-“Come to Reading you’re getting slashed g”

-“…I’ll have you clapped mate”

-“Kill yourself”

-“Kill yourself. Your family would be better off.”

-“You should jump off a bridge… You don’t deserve to walk the planet you piece of s**t.”

-“I’m not going to tell you to kill yourself but if I read an article headlined “Blogger Matt Walsh dead by apparent suicide, let’s just say I’d have a beer.”

There are plenty more where these came from.

A few points about these messages:

1) A few of these people made the mistake of wishing or threatening harm to my family while using their real names and photographs. They may have just caused life-altering problems for themselves. Since I chose to publish their names and messages, it will now live forever in the annals of the internet and any future or current employer who googles Taylor Nowicki (the guy who threatened to rape my five-year-old daughter) or Jeff Fahey (the guy who wished rape on every female member of my family) will see what kind of sick and disturbed people they are. The girlfriend of the author of one of the above messages reached out to me this morning. She was not aware that her boyfriend is the sort of person who treats people this way. She did not seem pleased with the revelation. I wonder if Jeff’s and Taylor’s families know that they like to wish rape on children? I suppose now they do.

I am not always a fan of public shaming, but neither am I always against it. Anyone who says any of the things quoted above should not be given the privilege of remaining anonymous. If you think it is okay to wish sexual violence on children or tell your ideological opponents to kill themselves, you should be expected to stand by those words publicly. If you can’t stand by them, if you would be ashamed to have your girlfriend or your mother or your employer find out what sorts of things you say to people from the comfort of your keyboard, then maybe you shouldn’t be saying them at all. That is the lesson that Taylor, Jeff, and company will learn the hard way.

2) When Ilhan Omar was getting death threats, we were told that it is “dangerous” and “irresponsible” to criticize her. It “puts her life at risk,” the media breathlessly insisted. Well will the media and the Left show the same concern for the safety of my wife, my children, and myself?

I would never be so absurd as to suggest that criticism endangers my life. But if we’re worried about reckless and irresponsible rhetoric that may lead crazy people to do crazy things, what about all of the people who have accused me of “defending rape” or being a “rape apologist” because I oppose the murder of babies conceived in rape? Tom Arnold actually implied that I am a rapist myself and then accused me of “blogging a lot of pro-rapist stuff.” If legitimate criticism of Omar endangers her life, then what about being libelously and falsely labeled a rapist by a public figure?

3) My experiences here are not unique. Pro-lifers encounter this kind of thing all the time. Stand outside of an abortion clinic with a sign sometime and you’ll hear all of this and worse. If vicious and violent rhetoric from pro-aborts was rare or aberrational, I could maybe expect to get one or two “kill yourself” messages in response to my pro-life opinions. But this is not one or two. This seems to be a pattern. Defile the altar of death upon which these people worship, and they will come after you with their fangs out. This is what abortion advocacy looks like with the mask off. An ugly, ugly creature indeed.