Senate Democrats Defeat Bid to Protect Abortion Survivors

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

The hands of the DemocRats are running red with the blood of innocent babies.

Here is what the Bible says about shedding innocent blood.


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,

Senate Democrats defeated legislation Wednesday that would have protected infants who survive abortions.

The Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act failed because nearly every Senate Democrat voted against the measure, which requires doctors to provide medical care for newborns who survive abortion attempts. The act received 52 votes, falling 8 short of the 60-vote threshold necessary to break the filibuster. Democratic senators Joe Manchin (W. Va.) and Bob Casey (Pa.) crossed the aisle to vote for the legislation.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R., Neb.), who introduced the legislation, decried the partisan vote. “This legislation isn’t red vs. blue, it is simply about giving every baby a fighting chance. Every baby deserves care. This isn’t about abortion, it’s about human rights,” he said.

Sasse has championed the bill in each legislative session since 2015. Senate Republicans have united around the legislation. The 52-vote margin marks a 4-vote decrease from 2020, when 56 senators voted for the legislation. Then-senator Doug Jones (D., Ala.) joined Manchin and Casey in voting for it along with all 53 Republican senators.

The Biden administration did not respond to a request for comment on its stance on the legislation. Vice President Kamala Harris voted against the legislation during her time in the Senate.

The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List praised Casey and Manchin for resisting their party and for representing the will of American voters. “The American people now know where every single U.S. senator stands on protecting babies born alive after failed abortions,” the group said. “The legislation should have received 100 votes, but sadly, 48 Democratic senators voted against life-saving care for babies born alive.”

The measure enjoys bipartisan support among voters. A poll found that more than three-fourths of respondents, including 70 percent of Democrats, favored mandating medical care for abortion survivors.

Sasse’s legislation has become a model for state legislatures that are taking similar action to protect abortion survivors. The Family Research Council found that 16 states offer protections similar to the ones proposed by the legislation, while 13 states have no protections in place.

Pro-abortion groups have criticized the proposal for “interfering in private medical decisions between patients and providers.” Planned Parenthood criticized a Kansas law modeled on the act and argued that Congress’s 2002 unanimous passage of a similar act rendered the new legislation unnecessary. Senate Democrats have also said that the act’s passage is unnecessary because of already existing law. The current legislation would have added the potential of federal criminal penalties for failing to care for an abortion survivor.

The act’s failure comes one week after the Biden administration rolled back restrictions on abortion through executive action.

Pro-Life Leaders Condemn Biden’s ‘Horrific’ Abortion Agenda on Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

H/T Western Journal.

If Joe Pee Pads Biden was half as good a Catholic as he claims to be he would know what God said about shedding innocent blood.

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

60 plus million babies murdered during the 48 years of Roe V Wade.

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-life leaders heavily criticized President Joe Biden on Friday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, after the Catholic president vowed to make Roe v. Wade the law of the land.

“Joe Biden repeatedly insists he is a devout Catholic,” tweeted Live Action founder and president Lila Rose. “He used this claim frequently during his campaign. He just released a statement praising Roe v Wade, but wouldn’t even use the word ‘abortion.’ His deception is disgusting. The violence of what he proudly supports is horrific.”

Biden marked the 48th anniversary of Roe v. Wade by promising to appoint judges who respect the ruling as precedent Friday. The newly elected president also said that he and Vice President Kamala Harris are committed to codifying Roe v. Wade.

The move triggered emotional responses from many pro-life leaders, particularly since Biden is the second Catholic president of the United States and the Catholic Church explicitly opposes abortion as a “crime against human life.”

“Joe Biden marks the anniversary of Roe v Wade by saying he is ‘deeply committed’ to the intentional destruction of innocent life through the heinous practice of abortion,” Catholic Vote tweeted. “This represents a major rupture with the Church, only days after his press secretary described Joe Biden as ‘devout.’”

March for Life President Jeanne Mancini emphasized an oft-repeated pro-life phrase in her condemnation of Biden’s statement: “Abortion isn’t healthcare.”

“It is heartbreaking but not surprising that on the day we commemorate the loss of 60+ million Americans to abortion the new administration is already aggressively leaning into abortion extremism,” Mancini tweeted. “Doing so brings more divisiveness at a time when our country needs unity and healing.”

The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List condemned Biden’s statement as “wrong.”

“President Biden & VP Harris just released a statement on the 48th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, absurdly calling it ‘foundational,’” SBA List tweeted. “Wrong. What is truly foundational is the right to LIFE of every American, as stated in the Declaration of Independence.”

Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton also commemorated the anniversary of Roe v. Wade in a Friday statement, mourning the “millions of lives lost over the 48 years since Roe v. Wade was decided and eliminated state pro-life protections.”

“I’ll continue to pray for those unborn children who are the victims of abortion, just as I’ll continue my work to protect unborn children and the fundamental rights of every human being.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

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.


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


Fuck that pathological liar /criminal 

Julia Ioffe


Can we publicize the fact that he cited your father and your friend, Candace Owens, as inspiration? 

254 people are talking about this

John Cusack


Fuck that pathological liar /criminal 

Julia Ioffe


Can we publicize the fact that he cited your father and your friend, Candace Owens, as inspiration? 

John Cusack


The only way democracy survives him – is if he rots in prison
Let’s get on with it 

John Cusack


Fuck that pathological liar /criminal 

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.


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.”

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.”