McConnell: Federal Abortion Ban is “Possible” if Court Strikes Down Roe v. Wade

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told USA Today this week that it is “possible” that Congress could pass a national ban on abortion if the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade is finalized. In the interview, McConnell confirmed that there would be nothing standing in the way of such national legislation. McConnell did not say that he was calling or planning for such a vote. He was stating that it would be legally possible if Roe is overturned. However, such a vote would leave the position of the GOP in an incomprehensible morass on its views in the area. For decades, Republicans have insisted that this issue is a state, not a federal, matter. It could also raise some difficult constitutional questions under federalism.

In the interview with USA Today published on Saturday, McConnell said:

“If the leaked opinion became the final opinion, legislative bodies—not only at the state level but at the federal level—certainly could legislate in that area,” he said. “And if this were the final decision, that was the point that it should be resolved one way or another in the legislative process. So yeah, it’s possible.”

The point of the comment is that, if there is no constitutional right to abortion, it is an area susceptible to legislative action on either the state or federal levels. Ironically, that is the same position as the Democrats who are seeking a federal protection of abortion to override the states.

There are some constitutional questions, however, that could be raised with either a federal protection or ban on abortion. Those questions include how states may be required to enforce such a ban. The Framers were deeply concerned about precisely this type of federal encroachment on state authority as James Madison discussed in Federalist #46. They created a system to support the “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.”

Such laws can unconstitutionally require states to enforce the federal law — raising so called “commandeering” issues that violate federalism protections. There can also be conditions that are viewed as so coercive in withholding state funds that they are considered unconstitutional.

In 1992, in New York v. United States, the Supreme Court invalidated part of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 as commandeering. In 1997, in Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the federal government cannot order states or cities to enforce federal law. In Independent Business v. Sebelius(2012), the Court held that the federal government could not compel states to expand Medicaid by threatening to withhold funding for Medicaid programs.  In Murphy v. NCAA (2018), the Court again warned that Congress could not take any action that “dictates what a state legislature may and may not do” in such policy or program disputes.

Ironically, if the GOP was to push such a ban, it would not only contradict its long-held view on state’s rights in the area but would rest upon a broad interpretation of interstate commerce (another view long opposed by many in the GOP). Under existing case law, Congress could claim that abortions have interstate elements due to the travel of individuals and involvement of national medical and administrative components.

It is doubtful that such a federal ban could pass in Congress. Indeed, some Republican members would most certainly oppose such a law like Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

If this was a trial balloon, it quickly turned into a lead balloon.  Pro-life members like Missouri GOP Senator Josh Hawley have already said that they would not back a federal ban. Likewise, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) said  on Sunday that such a national ban would be “inconsistent with what we’ve been fighting for.”

Notably, McConnell reaffirmed that (unlike the Democrats) the GOP would continue to stand by the filibuster even if they take control of the Senate. That effectively guarantees that no such federal ban could be passed.


279 thoughts on “McConnell: Federal Abortion Ban is “Possible” if Court Strikes Down Roe v. Wade”

  1. Couldn’t this backfire on Conservatives also? The “Heller” ruling could likely increase death rates – including deaths of young children (same as Roe). In this ruling, Alito was making the opposite case – the federal government could overturn local and state laws. Taking away states’ rights.

    Some gun rights could be covered by the 9th Amendment (ie: hunting, target shooting, etc) but not listed by name. The 2nd Amendment has “well-regulated” in it’s title and pertains mostly to government-controlled militias (today’s version of the National Guard).

    Wouldn’t overturning Roe also greatly impact “In Vitro Fertilization” which supposedly affects far more embryos than abortions do?
    Conservatives might regret tampering with Roe!

  2. If a perpetrator kills a pregnant woman,

    he is charged with two homicides,

    the homicide of the woman,

    and the homicide of the baby.

    Abortion is homicide.

    1. Apparently you don’t understand the role of a woman’s consent.

      No doubt you also confuse rape and consensual sex. Women are just brood mares, right?

      1. A leading feminist, many decades ago made the statement that ‘all sex is rape.’ And her peers didn’t contradict her

        1. I doubt you got that quote right.

          You can’t even name the “leading feminist” you purport to be quoting.
          Are you thinking of Andrea Dworkin? If so, you’re wrong, she never said “all sex is rape.”
          Are you thinking of Catherine MacKinnon? If so, you’re wrong, she never said “all sex is rape.”

          Unfortunately, I doubt you’ll provide evidence or retract the claim. You’d rather believe it without evidence.

      2. Opinion: I would concur with abortion in the case of actual rape.

        That would be not dissimilar to capital punishment for murder – an appropriately severe punishment for a heinous crime.

        1. The fetus did not commit rape.

          Regardless, you can not argue that a fetus is human AND allow abortion for rape and incest.

      3. A wicked solution for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes.

        That said, keep women, and girls, appointed available, and taxable, right?

        Deny women and men’s dignity and agency, and reduce human life to negotiable commodities.

        1. Those who demand that women and girls bring pregnancies to term against their will are the ones denying them dignity and agency.

          1. “It’s the [young human], stupid!”

            – James Carville

            Humans don’t live per the will of other humans, with the exception of barbarian dictators and despots.

            There are two humans to consider.

            The human mother carrying the young human baby.

            And the young human baby being carried by the human mother.

            If the human mother kills the young human baby, it is homicide.

            It’s the baby’s body and it’s the baby’s choice.

          2. Dignity and agency ? That is the best you can do ?

            If you think dignity is a right – you will be disabused of that by nature as you grow older.

            Regardless, what has dignity got to do with abortion ?

            Agency merely means exercising power over your own life.
            How is not being able to get an abortion a loss of agency ?

            Choices have consequences. Don’t use birth control, have sex, do not use the morning after pill – and you may get pregnant.
            Drive drunk and you might get arrested, or worse wreck, or worse still kill someone.

            Life rarely comes with “do overers”.

            1. John,
              IDGAF whether you approve of my responding to n.n. with the same “dignity and agency” language that n.n. used.

              1. You seem to think the blog is a private mail system.

                When you post, you are speaking to everyone.

                Whether you GAF or not.

                Regardless, neither are rights and your argument is obvious crap.

                Typical leftist nonsense throw around warm and fuzzy words, pretend that makes you look good and ignore that emotion is not argument.

          3. You do not seem to grasp that a valid argument is not one that sounds good.

            That the world does not work as we ask, no matter how persistent we are in our demands.

            I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice, but I am anti-stupidity.

            Atlast make an argument that has some merit.

            Let me give you a clue – arguments rooted in dignity or agency almost always are signs of weakness,
            They are appeals to emotion – not reason.

          4. Abortion is not dignity.
            Lack of responsibility is not dignity.
            Lacking human feelings for the unborn is not dignity.

        2. Given that you have not figured it to the extent government has power in your life – you are a negotiable commodity.

          Is there any government agency that has a 10 point dignity scale they factor into their decision making ?

      4. So the fetus did not consent to be killed in a homicide, but it does in an abortion ?

        Do you read your own posts before clicking post ?

        1. John, you’re more obtuse than I assumed. The capacity to consent or not lies with the pregnant woman/girl, not with the embryo/fetus.

          And I have to laugh at the irony your second question, because it’s clear that you vomit words onto the page without ever checking the streams of garbage that you’ve written.

          1. Doubling down on stupid.

            My point – which you missed was that consent is irrelevant.

            Whether you are a woman or a fetus you can not consent to be murdered.

            But exploring other flaws in your fallacious argument – if the woman can consent to the killing of a fetus – can she consent to the murder of her one year old ?

            Also if a woman has such life or death control over a fetus – why isnt her consent required to feed her children racist garbage in school ?

            You do not seem to understand – there is no logical foundation to the left, it is ALWAYS true that your positions on various issues will contradict each other – because there are not underlying principles to tie things together.

            In the real world a single contradication falsifies an entire set of claims about reality.

            “Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”

            ― Ayn Rand

    2. Since the Big Leak of Alito’s opinion, I have only heard one media comment pointing out that legalized abortions have removed, and will continue to remove, future Democrat Party voters from the citizenry. Which begs the question why Republicans are fighting to abolish the practice, once one removes the moral/religious argument from the table.

    3. What about “In Vitro Fertilization” – where you sacrifice multiple embryos to net one pregnancy? Conservatives have refused to allow the embryos headed to the landfill from IVF to be used for Stem Cell Research which could save lives.

      Wouldn’t IVF be next?

  3. All of these wedge-issues, like abortion, are a great diversion diverting our attention away from solving the national debt & deficit – that your children and grandchildren will inherit.

    Republicans have not been fiscal-conservatives during the 21st Century, sure they love talking about abortion.

    1. Republicans will say anything to stir up the faithful and get them to vote. Now, it’s abortion, CRT, and LGBTQ rights. Trump’s tax cut for the uber-wealthy caused the national debt to skyrocket, but that won’t get the Evangelicals to the polls to stop those harlots who are “killing unborn babies” or stop school children from being indoctrinated with CRT (which they aren’t, but facts don’t matter) or stop children from being indoctrinated into treating everyone with respect and dignity, including LGBTQ. Just ask Ron DeSantis, who is waging war against Disney World . When Roe was decided they didn’t really care very much about saving “unborn babies” because their undies were in a twist over school desegregation. Now, it’s the other wedge issues. It’s all they have, well, that and the “stolen landslide victory” of their hero.

  4. In my culture and Catholic faith, Mother’s Day is one of the holiest, sacred days in the year. Contrast the aforementioned with the following, and there leaves no doubt that evil exists in America.

    Antifa goons hurl Molotov cocktail into offices of Wisconsin anti-abortion group and spray chilling message saying: ‘If abortions aren’t safe you aren’t either’

    1. When has there been any doubt that some evil exists in America?

      For goodness sake, just think about the various mass shootings that occur every year. Just last year, there was the mass murder at Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, at the FedEx in Indianapolis, the Atlanta spa murders, at the Boulder King Soopers, … We force kids to go through active shooter drills because of the shooters at Parkland, Santa Fe, Sandy Hook, …

      Arson is wrong. Forcing women to continue a pregnancy against their will is also wrong.

      1. “Arson is wrong.
        Forcing women to continue a pregnancy against their will is also wrong.”
        False equivalence.

        Nature determines whether a woman must continue a pregnancy absent human intervention.
        If a woman’s will was alone sufficient to abort a fetus – we would not be having this debate.

        1. You’ve inferred an equivalence that was not implied. You have a lot of problems distinguishing between valid and invalid inferences.

          1. You have a problem with logically correct sentences.

            Please re-read what you wrote. Your reply contradicts itself.

            Regardless, this is not about inferences, it is about facts.

            I do not deal with mind reading. If you did not intend what you write – that is your problem.

            I deal with logic errors and contradictions in your posts.

    2. I’m a Catholic, and Mother’s Day ISN’T a holy day at all–Mother’s Day is a secular holiday, conceived by florists to sell flowers and greeting card companies.

  5. The Confederacy has struck back and y’all better get used to it, cuz you’re living by Mississippi’s rules now! And there ain’t no point in boycotting because nobody goes there anyway, lol.

    1. silenteblog……..My maternal great great grandfather was a simple Mississippi farmer, who did not own slaves. He had a wife and 5 young children when he was called to duty, and became a Confederate soldier, like real men did back then. His family never saw him again.
      He was captured, and became a prisoner at Camp Douglas in Chicago, the Union’s inhumane Prisoner of War camp. The Confederate soldiers were treated worse than animals. They were scarcely fed, and were not provided warmth when the Chicago winters had minus 20 degree weather!
      Along with Granddaddy, 6,000 died, by either starving or freezing to death.
      They are buried in a mass grave in Chicago, brave Confederate heroes all.
      That’s what I think of when I think of Mississippi.

      1. Traitors all, though just treatment is deserved for even your loser ancestor.

  6. If the Constitution provides Congress the power to write laws, such as the the U.S. Code, which it appears to do, Congress would have the power to write laws on abortion and every other mode of murder, homicide, manslaughter, etc.

    Mitch may be correct.

    And every new administration may rewrite abortion law upon every political change of power; potentially after every federal election.

  7. McConnell is possibly right that Congress would someday pass a national abortion law. Leaving it to the states will satisfy noone, as the restrictionist states will be thwarted by medical vacationing, mail-order pills, and other jurisdictional loopholes. But he is living in a political bubble to think a publicly elected Congress would pass a “ban”. It would be about defining abortion rights and responsibilities.

    Even the Mississippi Gestational Age Act defines a 15 week right to abortion.

    And don’t forget, the voters of Mississippi twice rejected a Personhood Amendment. Why? There was unanswered concern about how women who miscarry could be exposed to accusations of “helping it” or “wanting it”, leading to speculative charges of manslaughter.

  8. “The leaked draft of Alito’s opinion is dated February 10 and is almost surely obsolete now, as justices have had time to offer critiques, dissents and revisions. But as of last week, the five-member majority to strike Roe remains intact, according to three conservatives close to the court who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.
    “A person close to the court’s most conservative members said Roberts told his fellow jurists in a private conference in early December that he planned to uphold the state law and write an opinion that left Roe and Casey in place for now. But the other conservatives were more interested in an opinion that overturned the precedents, the person said.”

    So now there are more leaks, and this time, conservative leakers are willing to be identified as conservative leakers.

      1. On SCOTUSblog I was surprised to read that there were actually TWO leaks. The first was a leak to the Wall St. Journal as to the votes on the draft decision. Either the WSJ didn’t print the info (perhaps because they couldn’t verify it), or it didn’t garner much attention, I don’t recall. But in any case, that was followed by a SECOND leak, this time of the actual draft opinion, to Politico. The author of the SCOTUSblog opinion thinks there were two different leakers. I suppose he’s assuming that a conservative would have leaked to the WSJ…and the second leaker was a liberal. It’s all speculation, but the revelation of two leaks thickens the plot.

        1. The WSJ did print the info in an editorial on 4/26.

          Chris Geidner (
          “So, this is the *fourth* [known] leak:
          1. WSJ ed board (vote count, opinion assignment, Roberts’ efforts to moderate), Apr 26
          2. Politico (Feb 10 draft opinion), May 2
          3. Politico (vote count in Dec/early May), May 2
          4. Post (vote count in Dec/early May, Roberts’ view), May 7”

      2. Ti T, when you read the phrase “according to three conservatives close to the court,” do you see the word in bold?

  9. Happy Mother’s Day!

    Happy Mother’s Day to all those mothers together with fathers who conceive and bear children, all of whom constitute a family, which is protected by the institution of marriage, marriage deriving from the terms Mary, Mother of Jesus, as matrimony derives from the Latin word for mother, mater, both of which can only be entered into by heterosexual men and women for the purpose of human self-replication.

    1. George is wrong again. The word is derived via Old French from the Latin maritus, meaning a married man.

      Only took me a couple of minutes to use my search engine to discover that. Geez…

  10. Anything is possible, but too many that disagree with the Roe decision believe this is a state issue. McConnell was foolish in engaging in that type of discussion. I never liked McConnell and would have replaced him years ago.

    By the way, SEE 2000 MULES AND HOW THE 2020 ELECTION WAS STOLEN. Please pass it on so that we can remain a free country. The left has made bogus arguments against this documentary that have been debunked, as shown in an earlier email in a different thread.

      1. I already took your article and showed why it was bunk. If your left-wing hit piece has truth, tell us those particular facts. The data from the film was carefully managed so that they would get unquestionable results. They underestimated numbers using only a small number of localities and restricted which mules they would observe. Even with just a fraction of the mules, we see an election that was stolen and should have gone to Trump.

        Everyone should see 2000 Mules because one cannot understand the detail involved unless it is seen. Anonymous the Stupid is blowing wind again and cannot defend his position.

        See the movie and pass it around.

        1. I don’t need to see your stupid and undoubtedly deceitful piece. What I do see a malignant narcissist who can’t stand to be branded a loser, who has a loyal following of disciples who refuse to believe the following facts:

          1. Trump cheated in 2016 with Russia’s help by strategically spreading lies about Hillary Clinton; even a Republican Senatorial investigation proves this to be true; Dan Coats, head of US Intelligence Agencies, said it’s true. For telling this truth, Coats was fired

          2. Trump LOST the popular vote in 2016 and 2020, as certified by 50 Secretaries of State, 26 of whom were Republicans.

          3. When every poll predicted his loss, he began setting the stage for the Big Lie, well before Election Day, claiming his “landslide victory” would be “stolen” by a “rigged election”: in virtually every state, there were Republican and Democratic poll workers checking IDs, securing the ballots after they were cast, transporting the ballots to secure counting locations and were present when ballots were tabulated, including mail-in ballots;

          4. Chris Krebs, head of US Cybersecurity, said 2020 was the most-secure election in US history. Krebs was fired for telling this truth;

          5. 2020 saw a record voter turnout in the US, and Biden beat Trump by over 8 million votes; Trump never got even a 50% approval rating in 4 years’ time;

          6. Over 60 lawsuits alleging widespread voter fraud were dismissed for lack of anything resembling evidence. Rudolph Giuliani was suspended from the practice of law in NY State for filing lawsuits containing false allegations of fact for which he had no evidence. He is currently under disbarment proceedings;

          7. Dozens of recounts, re-recounts and “forensic” audits failed to turn up any evidence of widespread voter fraud;

          8. Trump’s utter incompetence and arrogance, consistent with his pattern of business insolvencies and bankruptcies, resulted in: a. a trade war with China, causing shortages of computer chips needed for consumer goods like automobiles and home appliances; we are still suffering from the backlog; b. worsening of the pandemic due to Trump’s constant lying and downplaying of the seriousness of the pandemic, despite being told the correct facts and recommendations by medical experts to take steps to curb transmission of COVID; Trump refused to acknowledge the seriousness because he thought it made him look bad and that he could bluster and lie his way out of the situation, which is his MO; because of the pandemic being made worse than it had to be if Trump had followed the advice of experts, the country was mostly shut down for about 2 years, school kids are behind in their studies, factories have backlogs of orders and shortages of workers because many of them sought other employment, offices were closed down, restaurants and other service industries still haven’t caught up and many have shut down, unemployment was above 10%; Biden has reversed some of these problems Trump caused, like unemployment, but we still have supply-chain issues that are contributing to the recession for which Republicans are trying to blame Biden;

          9. Bill Barr, head of DOJ, investigated Trump’s allegations, and found them to be, in his words, “bullsh*t”;

          10. Trump, desperate to reverse the loss he knew he had suffered, tried to bully the Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensberger, to “find” 1,780 votes. Raffensberger decided to record Trump, knowing that he’d brand Raffensberger a liar when the story came out. Raffensberger was right. Trump’s demand to falsify the true vote count constitutes a felony under Georgia law, and is further proof that he knows he lost and his desperation.

          11. In his continued desperation, Trump went on “Stop the Steal” campaigns, calculated to rile up the faithful fans to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”. So, thousands showed up at the Capitol. As it turns out, evidence is being developed that Trump and his campaign were involved in the planning and execution of the Jan 6th insurrection along with the Proud Boys and other radical right-wing groups;

          12. In his continued desperation and still lacking any proof to back up the Big Lie, Trump pressured and bullied Pence to refuse to accept the certified ballots from each of the states, something he had NO authority to do, and when that didn’t work, he told his fans to also pressure Pence to “do the right thing”, resulting in calls for Pence to be lynched, including the erection of a gallows at our Capitol.

          No quantum of evidence will ever convince Trump fans of the forgoing facts, which are the truth and which prove that Trump knows that DID lose and that he is NO patriot. His arrogance and narcissism should be revolting to reasonable people. There is NO way, considering the consistent polling predicting his loss, with his consistent unpopularity, plus the pandemic out of control, plus the economy in the toilet, that Trump even COULD HAVE won.

          1. As usual Natacha believes that her enlightenment doesn’t have to be concerned with the facts. At one time there were people who would not look at the facts concerning evolution. Natacha says, “Facts! I don’t need to see no stinkin facts.” In the movie “Gone With The Wind”, William Jennings Bryan when asked under cross examination if the Bible was to be taken literally just like Natacha he said “I do not think about the things I do not think about.” He had his religion and Natacha has hers.

          2. Natacha is calling people on the right losers. Read em and weep Natacha. Fox News averaged 2.86 million viewers in primetime, up 19% from the same month a year earlier. MSNBC averaged 1.28 million, down 29%, and CNN averaged 1.22 million, up 1%. In the 25-54 demo, It seems that the losers are on Natacha’s side and it is she who just won’t admit it.

            1. You Trump dopes believe whatever they tell you. Examples: Trump draws big crowds to his rallies, so this is absolute proof that he MUST have won the election–right? Fox has more viewers than MSNBC, so Fox must be right and MSNBC is wrong. I’ve explained this to you before, but here goes: you Trumpsters are part of a cult that has taught you to believe whatever your exalted leader tells you, including the claim that you cannot and should not believe mainstream media because they lie to you. Trump says he won “by a landslide”, so that must be true, yet, every time another forensic audit turns up proof that Biden won, every time a court rejects lawsuits filed to try to overturn election results due to lack of facts, they tune into Fox for their daily affirmation that it’s just another “lamestream media” lie. The disciples have a pathological emotional need daily affirmation, which is why they tune into Fox to hear the latest attack on Biden, the Democrats, how CRT is destroying America, that LGBTQ people are weirdos who deserve to be shunned, and all of the other slop they emotionally rely on because they literally can’t handle the truth, which is that Trump is a loser, a phony, the worst occupant of the Oval Office ever, and that HE LOST in 2020 by over 8 million votes.

              TIT: you are a perfect example. Please DISPROVE any of the FACTS I listed above. You can’t, and you know it, so you pivot to something else. More Fox viewers than MSNBC is proof of nothing other than the needy dependency of Trumpsters like you.

              1. Logic is not your forte.

                The crowds trump draws – as well as the abysmal crowds that Biden drew are evidence of multiple things – which have meaning in context of the election.

                When 30000 people come to see one person and 30 to see the other – and that occurs regularly over months.
                That demonstrates a CLEAR difference in both the depth and breadth of support.

                “Every election is determined by the people who show up.”
                ― Larry J. Sabato

                It is quite reasonable to beleive and to argue that a candidate who can not get 3 dozen people to show up for a campaign spot, is going to be obliterated by the one that can get 1000 times that many. And if that does not occur – there is good reason to suspect fraud.

                Right and wrong are not decided by popularity – but one excellent measure of popularity is who shows up.

                which forensic audits would that be ? The only forensic audits occured AFTER the election, and thus far only the AZ audit was allowed to complete.
                Further forensic audits should not require election challenges – they should be a matter of course and a means of discouraging fraud.

                You will never find any fraud if you do not look for it, and you can be assured you will get ever more fraud so long as you are blind to the possibility.

                Further – you cite several things we are supposed to trust – appeals to authority.

                But you do so at a time in which those same institutions have burned their own trust to the ground.

                1. I believe the polls prior to 2016 that correctly predicted Trump would lose the popular vote. I believe the hundreds of polls, conducted over the four years our White House was occupied by a cheater, that said more than 50% of Americans disapproved of Trump. I believe the dozens of pre-2020 polls that correctly predicted Trump would lose in 2020. You believe a pathological liar addicted to praise, affirmation and attention. You cannot gauge voter preferences by who shows up at rallies, either, as the 2020 election has proven.

                  1. This is an old lame argument.

                    The winning team int he superbowl often has less possession time, and less offensive years than the losing team.

                    But that is not how you win.

                    Clinton lost in 2016 – because you wasted time in California running up her popular vote numbers where it was easy to do so, instead of going where the votes she needed were – god forbid she should rub elbows with some blue collar worker in OH.

                    Even Bill was telling her to go to the rust belt because she was in trouble.

                  2. Trump is currently polling 6pts ahead of Biden on RCP’s agregate for 2024
                    Biden’s current approval is 40%. 59% disapprove. At this time in 2018 Trumps approval was 49% – 9pts higher than Biden’s is now.
                    Biden’s approval has been Below Trump’s at the same time for all of 2022.

                    1. Biden’s numbers are propped up by the press. If the press were neutral his numbers would be much lower. There might even be a demand by the public to impeach him.

                  3. All the 2020 election proved is that given lawlessness, friendly courts, friendly media, big tech supression, and large scale fraud – democrats can get a dead horse over the line.

              2. Most of the country no longer beleives the media – because they lie, constantly.
                Sometimes those lies are about Trump, sometimes about Biden. sometimes about Covid, or Musk, Often yesterdays hero becomes today’s racist whitesupremecist – because today their actions do not suit the left. It really does not matter what it is they are lying about or who they are lying about, the only time you can trust most of the media today is when they report something that contradicts their nature.

                Regardless, the media – and the rest of our institutions have done this too themselves.

                You constantly keep pushing this odd nonsense that Trump has in some cases 80% of the country in his thrall.

                Really ? You are parroting the same stupid nonsense behind the collusion delusion.
                I did not like and did not vote for Trump -ever, but definitely in 2016.
                That did not make Hillary palatable.

                But the first version of the collusion delusion was that Trump somehow worked with Putin to sway US voters in key states in 2016.
                Long before I saw the stupid FB adds that were being run from Russia, or knew how few there were or that they were about equally split between sanders, Trump and Clinton – I grasped this did not make any sense.

                Putin may be evil – but he is not an idiot – Clinton was corrupt – Putin could work with her – and had obviously with the U1 deal.
                Conversely everything Trump promised would be negative for Russia.
                Only idiots beleive world leaders are going to knowingly and deliberately act against their own countries interests.

                Further – Trump did not win by something like 200,000 votes in 3 states – he actually moved 2.5M votes in those states from 2012 to 2016.

                That was not possible to accomplish using stupid Russian adds that persuaded no one.
                Regardless if Trump needed 200K more votes – he could drop a couple of million on Cambridge analytica.

                Only idiots beleve that they can get more votes by engaging in difficult, dangerous collusion with Russia – whose actual grasp of US politics is inept, rather than buying the best and brightest in the political advertising game in the US.

                I did not need to like Trump to know that the collusion delusion was idiotically stupid.

                What surprised me was that with media support such large numbers of people bought this idiocy for so long.

                Now we know the whole thing was a hoax manufactured by the Clinton Campaign.

                Getting to the real truth has proven to be a tedious and nearly impossible truth.
                Yet the DOJ and FBI and even the Special Counsel knew it within weeks or at most months of Trump’s inauguration.

                As Maya Angelou said – when someone shows you who they are believe them the first time.

                Since late 2016 myriads of things have happened to demonstrate over and over that the MSM, Social Media, the left, democrats can not be trusted. Not about Trump – not about anything.

              3. Nutacha – very little of what you said is even plausible.

                Regardless, the burden of proof rests highest with those who have been caught over and over selling and beleiving in hoaxes and lies.

                We are way past needing to disprove whatever you say.

                If you said it was may – I would demand proof – you have burned your cedibility.

                1. “Plausible”–how can opinion polls showing Trump never got even a 50% approval rating in 4 years’ time, or the pre 2016 and pre 2020 polls predicting he would lose the popular vote, all of which you can look up (other than Rasmussen, which is unreliable) be implausible? What IS inexplicable is the devotion of people like you to a carnival snake charmer like Trump who couldn’t even successfully handle his own business affairs after his father stopped supporting him financially.

                  1. Rassmussen have produced the most accurate presidential election polling in 3 of the past 4 elections.

                    Regardless, everyone involved with polling knows from several elections where the polls just missed, that the margin for error in polling is atleast 3pts.

                  2. Trump was absolutely born with a silver spoon. By the time his father died he was worth between 50-150M.

                    He was worth about 3-4B by the time of the 2016 election.

                    Let me reiterate – that is AFTER his father died.

                    if multiplying your net worth by a factor of 30-40 is failing – please god let me fail like that.

                    BTW I am not “devoted” to Trump.
                    I have never voted for him.
                    I am libertarian not republican.

                    There is plenty to criticise about Trump.

                    That said most of the media and left criticism is false.
                    I would be more impressed if you stuck to things that are true.

                    I disagree with him on several major policies – but democrats are worse on those policies.

                    I do not think Trump was a great president. But he was preceded by two failures and succeeded by possibly the worst president in US history.
                    He is far and away the best president in the 21st century – that is just not saying much.

                    I do not like Trump much – but I like people who LIE constantly even less.

                    The Collusion Delusion was an OBVIOUS lie from the start.

                    As was the Biden Crime syndicate coverup.

                    And now we have an explosion of evidence of misconduct in the 2020 election.

                    It was evident from BEFORE the election that the election was lawless. States violating their own constiotutions and election laws all over.

                    Whether the supression of the Hunter Biden laptop story flipped the election – it certainly dramatically effected it. And not just at the presidential level. Was that Fraud ? No. Was it an Immoral and unethical conspiracy to deceive voters – undeniably.
                    Big tech killed the story – even suspending social media accounts of major news outlets. While the rest of the media echoed the LIE that this was disenformation – an OBVIOUS LIE told by former and current intelligence officials.

                    Regardless of whatever else you beleive – this is not the actions of moral or ethical people.

                    There has been plenty of evidence of election fraud at the time of the election and since.
                    There were a few stupid claims made early on – the benford numbers distribution for fraud detection only works when numbers are truly random – precinct vote tallies are not.

                    Lots of problems were found with the election scanners and counters – including hiding errors. But todate there is no evidence of coordinated fraud rooted in scanners or DVS.

                    Claims regarding signature matching have held up. The GA audit found a 0.6% FRAUD rate in mailin ballots and a 6% error rate – ballots that should have been rejected that were not. 6% BTW is the normal error rate for mailin voting. That is an ERROR rate not a fraud rate.
                    But we are expected to beleive that in 2020 states with no experiance in mailin voting magically had an error rate below 0.25% ?

                    Myriads of errors, as well as evidence of fraud was found in the AZ audit. I would note that the AZ audit dovetails almost perfectly with the TTV ballot harvesting findings in AZ.

                    with only 5% of ballot scans reveiwed in GA – about 500 duplicate ballot scans were found, before that audit was shut down. That finding almost certainly corroborates the poor surveilance video that appears to show the same ballots being scanned over and over at convention center in atlanta.

                    There are two different collections of undercover videos from Philadelphia of election officials destroying election records after the election – that is a federal crime.

                    TTV has over 4 million minutes of video of ballot boxes showing many many instances of ballot fraud. But in most places – like all of PA – that required official video was destroyed.

                    You can attack the TTV 2000 mules evidence – it does not prove who won the election. But it DOES prove there was large scale coordinated FRAUD – CONSERVATIVELY 400K votes in 6 swing states – and probably 2-4 times that much.

                    This was a CONSPIRACY, this was NOT random in person fraud or a few people sending ballots back for other people.
                    This is not fraud on the scale of dozens of votes but on the scale of hundreds of thousands of votes. Plausibly over a million votes in just a FEW parts of 6 states.

                    We will have to see what happens. The media will try to kill this, there is little chance that PA will investigate.
                    But GA for once appears to be persuing this – WI probably will.

                    An actual law enforcement effort will fairly easily unravel this. There are way too many people involved. Mules are going to rat out the people they worked for.

                    Anyway I really do not like LIARS.

                    I listened to 4 years of ranting that Trump was a liar.
                    But what I found was massive often crazy lying by those opposed to Trump.

                    Finally – even if you are correct about Trump, he is still a saint compared to you, the left, the democratic party.

              4. “Trump is a loser, a phony, the worst occupant of the Oval Office ever, and that HE LOST in 2020 by over 8 million votes.”

                Trump is the Great MAGA KIng. We are Ultra MAGA. Joe Biden, the illegitimate occupant of the Whte House, said so!

          3. Natacha, It is clear that you work for someone or an organization. You’re under no obligation to disclose on whose payroll you have been or currently are, but if I’m wrong, and you keep a numbered list such as the one offered in your comments above, you are most certainly a very dedicated human being and apparently quite well-organized. Happy Mother’s Day.

            1. I’m flattered to see that you believe that my postings are powerful enough to deserve payment. But, as I’ve said many times before, I’m just a passionate American patriot, related to one of our founding fathers, who is repulsed by Donald Trump, his cheating, his lies, the damage he has done to this country, our relations with our allies, and the internal division he causes because of his delicate ego and need for attention, praise and to avoid being branded a loser. I relate facts and get called all sorts of names, but you Trump lovers simply cannot refute the simple truth about your hero, so you resort to name-calling and false accusations. I don’t work for any organization.

      2. Anonymous, have you actually seen the movie 2000 Mules or are you just relying on a so-called fact checker. I have not seen the movie so I am withholding my opinion. You write of people who only want to hear what they want to hear but you make a statement without telling us if you have seen the movie. The real evidence of confirmation bias lays on your doorstep. Your a good trooper. They tell you what to say in the morning and your going to post it wether you have all the information or not. Please get back to us when you have seen the movie in it’s entirety. We await your further evidence of your more thoroughly studied evaluation of the truth.

        1. Who is the “they” that you believe “tell” me “what to say”?

          Please get back to me when you’ve gotten a statement from these people.

        2. Thinkit, after you see the movie, you might want to suggest it to your Marine buddies. They stood fast to protect all of us from America’s enemies, and now the enemy is entrenched on the left, violating the law of the land and trying to gain complete control over our government.

  11. Mitch and many others didn’t do their research when they voted for some of the current Justices. Going to be a lot of red faces when this is over – hopefully soon. Great stunt to rip the country further apart and for no reason.

  12. The 9th amendment clearly states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

    And the 14th Amendment clearly states in part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    These ARE in the Constitution, no matter how much you wish to ignore them.

    1. The above was posted as a reply to Thinkitthrough’s 12:11 PM statement that “A right to abortion is not in the constitution.”

    2. As YOU choose to interpret them. Other liberals, like Ruth Bader Ginsberg, have interpreted the 9th (privacy right) differently and say Roe was wrongly decided even though they are, by-and-large, pro-abortion.

      1. No, RBG did NOT “say Roe was wrongly decided.” Which is why you aren’t quoting her and are instead substituting what you wish she’d said.

        She wasn’t entirely happy with specific parts of the decision in Roe, but she did NOT say that it was wrongly decided.

        She did say things like the following:

        In a 1993 lecture:
        “The seven to two judgment in Roe v. Wade declared “violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” a Texas criminal abortion statute that intolerably shackled a woman’s autonomy; the Texas law “except[ed] from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the [pregnant woman].” Suppose the Court had stopped there, rightly declaring unconstitutional the most extreme brand of law in the nation, and had not gone on, as the Court did in Roe, to fashion a regime blanketing the subject, a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force. Would there have been the twenty-year controversy we have witnessed, reflected most recently in the Supreme Court’s splintered decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey? A less encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day, I believe and will summarize why, might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy.”

        In her confirmation hearings she said:
        “Abortion prohibition by the State, however, controls women and denies them full autonomy and full equality with men. That was the idea I tried to express in the lecture to which you referred.”

        “It is essential to woman’s equality with man that she be the decisionmaker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints that impede her choice, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.”

        “the applicable Air Force regulations — if you are pregnant you are out unless you have an abortion — violated the equal protection principle, for no man was ordered out of service because he had been the partner in a conception, no man was ordered out of service because he was about to become a father. Next, then we said that the Government is impeding, without cause, a woman’s choice whether to bear or not to bear a child. Birth was Captain Struck’s personal choice, and the interference with it was a violation of her liberty, her freedom to choose, guaranteed by the due process clause. … The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”

    3. “…nor shall any State deprive any person (i.e. AN INDIVIDUAL EXTANT FROM THE COMPLETION OF FERTILIZATION TO THE TIME AND DATE OF DEATH) of life, liberty, or property,…”

      1. George, you’re a liar when you insert your own opinion into the Constitution.

        The Constitution has NEVER held that an embryo is a person. Never. Not a single day in the entire history of the US.

        You’re just a misogynist who considers women to be breeding stock and who calls women’s right to vote “the 19th Dumbmendment.” I’ve never once seen a conservative here call you out on your misogyny. For them, your misogyny is fine, as long as you ally yourself with them on other things.

        1. An embryo is a very, very young human being – a very, very young person.

          An ovum and a sperm become a very, very young human after the 24-hour fertilization period.

          It’s not a rock, it’s not a pond, it’s not a volcano, it’s not a tree, it’s not an elephant, it’s not a cumulonimbus cloud formation, it’s a human being, a very young human being, it’s a person.

          If not interdicted by feminazis, an embryo will develop as a human (i.e. man) to maturity and persist for an average of 78.8 years.

          homi = man

          cide = kill

          Abortion is homicide.

          Next question?

    4. Anonymous, the simple answer to your post is the passage of a new amendment to the constitution that would add a right to abortion. Life and Liberty may be deprived with the process of law. Why is it that you are against creating a new amendment that would formally codify a right to abortion? Instead you are in favor of short cuts to get the law that you desire. You are not in favor of changing the law because you know that there would be certain stipulations in the law that would limit abortion that you would not agree with. You would rather have the laws declared by the King.

      1. “any person” is a large set, but that set does not include embryos. An embryo is not a person. The 14th Amendment does not hold that embryos have rights.

        Why is it that you frequently ask questions and make statements pretending to read people’s minds?
        Why is it that you’d rather claim something false about someone you disagree with than have a truthful discussion?
        Why is it that you falsely believe an embryo is has legal personhood?
        Why is it that you falsely believe that the 14th Amendment gives embryos rights?

  13. The Democrats want to have total control over all the people. A right to abortion is not in the constitution. I am pro life and I hate the taking of a life. However, if the residents of a blue state decide that abortion should be allowed in their state I believe that they have a right to codify an abortion law through their elected representatives. I believe that our system of governance allows the states to come to their own decisions. As an example, if the people of Florida should decide that the are not in agreeance with the requirements of the new abortion law they can vote those who wrote the law out of office. This is just one of many ways that the centralized government faction in our nation want to control our lives from the cradle to the grave. Be aware, they are are willing to take control by decree rather than legislation. They believe that their superior intellect gives them the right to say what you will or will not do and forced conscription will be lustily applied whenever they decide it is necessary.

    1. You make no sense. Banning abortion is exactly government taking control over the people. The “let the states decide” is the weakest of the anti-abortion arguments. I disagree with “a fetus is a person” but is a far more convincing and clean argument to make.

      1. Biology doesn’t care about what you think. All mammalian life, including human, starts at conception. For God’s sake, read a biology textbook dealing with mammalian reproduction someday. The issue is ‘when is it okay to kill my unborn baby without legal sanction.’

        1. Yes, a human life begins from conception. Also, a baby is viable from six weeks, the first heart beat, coherent nervous system function, until she is a granny, the last heart beat, and disordered nervous system, an exquisite symmetry.

          That said, a woman, and man, have four choices: abstention, prevention, adoption (“shared responsibility’), and compassion (“personal responsibility”), and self-defense through reconciliation. The wicked solution a.k.a. planned parent/hood is neither a good nor exclusive choice.

          That said, we should be wary of exercising liberal license to indulge diversity [dogma] (e.g. ageism) to justify reproductive rites for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes.

          Imagine there is no wicked solution
          It’s easy if you try
          No abortion chambers
          In front of us only time
          Imagine all the babies
          Living for today

          1. The sounds heard at 6 weeks are NOT a heart beat–they are the artificial sounds of electrical impulses created by the ultrasound machine. For there to be an audible heart beat, the heart has to have four chambers, separated by 2 valves that open and close with contractions of the atria and ventricles, resulting in the well-known “lub-dub” sound. The primitive heart at 6 weeks has not developed to the point of creating this sound. It takes 10 to 12 weeks for there to be an audible, true heart beat. Just another anti-abortion lie calculated to strip up the faithful.

            1. “The Faithful” have no doubt that human life begins at conception.
              And they are correct, while birth and many other things are uncertain – prior to conception, this specific human did not exist, after it does.
              Many things could happen after conception, just as things will happen after birth.

              Viability is a poor argument – newborns are not viable – they can not survive on their own.
              8 year olds probably can not survive on their own.

              arguments about heart beats and paid – are not to persuade people who believe a human life begins at conception, but to persuade those like you who do not.

              I would note your heart beat argument is both technical and technically flawed. Once fertilized at various stages of development a huamn embryo can not be externally distinguished from other mammals or even some other animals.

              But our inability to distinguish does not alter the fact that the embryo will only develope into a human – not a frog or a bear.

              That said – like some of the lower forms of life – ta functioning embryonic heart exists long before it is the 4 chambered heart that is characteristic of mammals. The absence of a Lub Dub sound does not make it any less a heart.

              But all this does not matter – if as you claim an embryo is only human at some particular stage of development – why that specific point ?
              Why when a 4 chambered heart ? Why Viability – however you define that ? Why birth ? why not when it can see, or speak or walk, or after puberty ?

              What universally accepted “scientific” criteria says that at this moment – we have something fully human, but a few seconds before it is just biological sludge ?

            2. I should have said “4 valves”. The point is, there is NO audible heartbeat at 6 weeks because the heart isn’t formed yet.

        2. No, mammalian life doesn’t start at conception. The egg and sperm are themselves alive. When the egg and/or sperm isn’t alive, conception cannot occur.

          Take your own advice about reading a biology text.

          1. Thank you. Individual human life DEVELOPS (or ceases) over months in the womb, followed by years of parenting.
            The quality of the citizenry must be replenished with persons as able, or more able than their parents to cope effectively with freedom and taking responsibility. Therefore, the focus should be on developmental thinking, i.e., what makes for the best development of the child. Unwanted children, forced by the state, is a recipe for neglect and misery.

            1. Life begins at conception. Your wish-casting is not scientific

              A sperm cell and an egg cell are incomplete “stripped down” cells by design; they are also known as gametes. All other cells in the human body, numbering 30 trillion cells, are vastly different from gametes. The former are called “germ cells”, the latter “somatic cells”.

              Germ cells have 23 chromosomes which makes it an incomplete cell. Germ cells can not undergo cell division. Germ cells lack cytoplasmic cellular components. Germ cells do not possess biochemical pathways like the Krebs cycle, electron transport chain, Cory cycle, etc to keep alive continuously independently.

              Somatic cells have 46 homologous chromosomes. Somatic cells have the unique ability to undergo cell division. Somatic cells have cytoplasmic cellular components (e.g. Peroxisomes, Endoplasmic reticulum, lysosomes, Golgi bodies, etc) making them the basic unit of life.

              Gametes fuse to create the basic, core structural and foundational unit of life. Life begins at conception. The science is clear.


              1. “A sperm cell and an egg cell are incomplete “stripped down” cells by design; they are also known as gametes.”

                Yes, and the gametes are themselves **living** cells. If they were not alive, conception could not occur. This is basic biology.

                You claim to be a physician, so you should understand that.

                “Life begins at conception.”

                It does not. Developmental biologist P.Z. Myers: “it is absurd to talk about a life beginning at conception because it didn’t begin then: the precursors to the zygote were also alive.” As you say, the science is clear.

                1. So your argument is “life begins before conception” ?

                  Regardless, from the moment of fertilization – there is now a uniquely different creature, that will ultimately express every single genetic attribute of a specific-unique human being.

                  From conception forward – but NOT before, the sex is determined, the hair color is determined. the eye color is determined – even though no eyes yet exist, the fingerprint is set – even though there are no fingers. Every single attribute of a specifc human that is determined by genes is set at that moment – not before – and not afterword.

                  Fertilization is not the beginning of life.
                  It is the beginning of the life of a specific human.

                  1. John,

                    No, my point is that life began at abiogenesis. That was the only time that life began. It has been continuous since then. In mammals, the life cycle moves through the production of functioning haploid gametes, intercourse and fusion of haploid gametes into a diploid zygote, prenatal development / birth / maturation, production of functioning haploid gametes, intercourse and fusion of haploid gametes into a diploid zygote, prenatal development / birth / maturation, … — over and over. Once a species comes into existence, there is no “start” to the cycle, only continuation of the cycle and possible extinction. Our species came into existence ~200K years ago, and human life has likewise been continuous, with no “start” to the life cycle. Here’s one image of the human life cycle from a biology dept:

                    There is no “moment of fertilization.” The process of fertilization takes ~24 hours.

                    Re: “there is now a uniquely different creature,” no, there is a unique cell. That cell is not a “creature.” The embryo is sometimes capable of cellular homeostasis (and sometimes it isn’t, and quickly dies), but it is not capable of organismal homeostasis and so does not meet the scientific criteria for being a distinct organism.

                    Your belief that “Every single attribute of a specifc human that is determined by genes is set at that moment” demonstrates your scientific ignorance. First: the majority of the time, the zygote is biologically incapable of developing into a “specific human.” It may undergo cell division a few times, but then dies — most often prior to implantation. Second, for embryos that do develop, the human it develops into is also affected by the woman’s body (e.g., maternal nutrition and hormones), and possibly also with one or more other embryos, if the woman conceives more than one and sometimes if she’s had prior pregnancies.

                    Every single person who is born has more than one genetically distinct set of cells in our bodies, a result of micro or macro mosaicism and/or chimerism from diverse sources: two zygotes can fuse, copy errors lead to different cell lines, maternal cells can cross the placental barrier, cells can remain from previous pregnancies and migrate, blood transfusion can occur between dizygotic twins with a shared placenta, …

                    The existence of of copy errors, for example, is why “identical” twins are not genetically identical.

                    Biology is more complex than you recognize or apparently wish to learn.

                    1. Baby doo-doo.

                      Hides under LINKS and doesn’t get the point.

                    2. Socrates in biologial form.
                      Jeremiah 1:5
                      “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

                      Hakuna Matata

                      Regardless, the biological entity that is you became a new living being at fertilization, and will cease to exist at death.

                      Your long diatribe on biology as fascinating as it may be is not legally relevant.
                      If you wish to discuss religion, philosophy, the circle of life – all completely different topics.

                    3. Also the fact that I am dismissive of your argument is more because it is irrelevant that wrong.
                      Recognizing when complexity is not relevant to a specific argument is not the same as not recognizing complexity

                  2. “Fertilization is not the beginning of life.
                    It is the beginning of the life of a specific human.”

                    Top-notch John.

              2. “Life begins at conception.”

                Human cells are alive. That’s true.

                So when you slough off live skin cells or an organ is removed — that’s “murder?”

                  1. The *potential* to develop into.

                    Let’s not be evasive.

                    Sure be nice if more people understood the implications of their own premises.

                    1. What are you trying to say?

                      Certainly not that skin cells are the equivalent of a fertilized egg.

      2. Sammy, is there any instance where you believe that the states have any rights at all? Should the states be allowed to levy their own taxes? Should California have the right to eliminate the use of nuclear reactors and fracking. I am sure that you are all in on these restrictions by the states. How should states rights be considered in these instances but not be considered concerning abortion. The states rights argument is the essence of what our nation was founded on. Unlike the so-called right to abortion states rights can be found in the constitution. It seems that you are willing to undue the basic principles found in our constitution over this one issue. Please inform us of any other instances where you believe that we should disregard the constitution. Perhaps you have many.

        1. If the government can dictate reproduction, where does the power of the government end?

  14. L. Luppen: “Blake Masters, the fascist-friendly vessel for Peter Thiel’s money who is running for Senate in Arizona, says on his website that he wants to overturn Griswold too.”

    Griswold v CT is the Supreme Court ruling that held “A right to privacy can be inferred from several amendments in the Bill of Rights, and this right prevents states from making the use of contraception by married couples illegal.”

    Masters’ website says “In the U.S. Senate I will: … Vote only for federal judges who understand that Roe and Griswold and Casey were wrongly decided, and that there is no constitutional right to abortion.” But he’s clearly saying that there is also no federal right to contraception.

    These are the kinds of candidates that Republicans are putting forward and that in some cases already hold state or federal positions.

    A couple of days ago, Brent Crane (R-Nampa), the Idaho State Affairs Committee Chair had the following exchange with a journalist:

    Q: How about abortion pills via mail or IUDs or Plan B, would you hear legislation to ban those?
    Crane: I would, absolutely. There is some concerns, health concerns actually with the medication … [talking about abortion pills] Yes, I think we need to look at that legislation -, or look at legislation that would deal with those particular -, prescribing of those abortifacients.
    Q: How about IUDs and Plan B though?
    A: Um, Plan B I probably would hear that legislation. IUDs I’m not, I’m not for certain yet on where I would be on that particular issue.
    You can watch/listen here: That particular exchange starts ~10:44.

    Note that Plan B is not an abortifacient. There’s some question of whether the mechanism of action is partially as a contragestive (reducing the odds of implantation), but the research I’ve seen is that it’s just a contraceptive (reducing the odds of conception). Similarly, research indicates that the mechanism of action by which IUDs work is as a contraceptive, not an abortifacient.

    Women and men should have access to the full range of safe and effective forms of birth control.

  15. The incoherent and hysterical horrors of the 19th Dumbmendment.


    “My body, my choice.”

    Not your body!

    It’s the body of your son or daughter, a separate and distinct individual human being, which you are charged by God and Nature with protecting and nurturing until it is independent and self-sustaining.

    If you abort your baby, you kill your baby – you commit homicide.

    1. Homicide is unlawful killing of a person. Legal abortions clearly aren’t homicide.

      You’re a misogynist who wants white women to be breeding stock. You’ve repeatedly claimed that you do not want women to even have the right to vote.

      1. The sole achievement of the 19th Dumbmendment is abortion, the murder of 64 million human being babies, aka homicide.

        And that is to ignore the imperative female “crutch” of unconstitutional affirmative action (ladies, “don’t leave home without it” – and keep breaking that MAN’S glass ceiling), and the death of America by way of a fertility rate in a “death spiral” (more Americans die than are born) and replacing the population with foreign invaders, changing the American “melting pot” of Europeans into a universal cesspool.

        That ain’t no way to run a railroad.

        That ain’t no way to run a country – especially the nation of American exceptionalism, the greatest country in the history of the world, the United States of America.

        Roe v Wade was a case of mass incoherence and hysteria brought against a spineless, incognizant, anti-Constitution Supreme Court, which was more likely than not high on the “acid” of the 70’s freak show, by an immature, overzealous, radical, activist feminazi, 26 year-old Sarah Weddington, who had never argued a case. She didn’t “win” so much as she and the wack job left were “awarded” the insane right to compel national self-hate and national suicide.

        This nation has been stolen and destroyed by incoherent and hysterical, radical, extremist, direct and mortal enemies of America.

        “Keep it.” Keep the “republic” of Ben Franklin; keep the rational and calm, restricted-vote American republic.

        The first thing the next rational, conservative administration must do is repeal the 19th Dumbmendment.

        NOT ONE BUT THREE!!!

        Ask yourselves, how did “Crazy Abe’s” successors do it?

        Ratifying and/or repealing an amendment is next to impossible.

        “Crazy Abe” Lincoln’s communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO) successors were somehow able to ram through, not one, but three amendments to the Constitution, in practically no time al all.

        America needs to do that; just do what “Crazy Abe” and his successors did, however they did it and no matter how they did it, in no time at all.

        Ram it through…proceed from there.

        “Just win, baby!”

        – Al Davis


        – Larry the Cable Guy

  16. “ Notably, McConnell reaffirmed that (unlike the Democrats) the GOP would continue to stand by the filibuster even if they take control of the Senate. That effectively guarantees that no such federal ban could be passed.”

    McConnell has no credibility on what he promises or says he won’t do. He’s already proven that he can’t be trusted. There is no trust in anything the GOP says. Turley is being comically naive.

    “ Ironically, if the GOP was to push such a ban, it would not only contradict its long-held view on state’s rights in the area but would rest upon a broad interpretation of interstate commerce (another view long opposed by many in the GOP).”

    The GOP already does this at the state level. Republicans always argue local government is best for its citizens because they are closest to them. HOWEVER when those cherished local decisions contradict what the state government wants they are immediately overruled. Say gun control. Local governments historically have been able to determine how guns are controlled in their counties or towns. Now the state legislatures dictate what they can do in their local municipalities despite its citizens agreeing to the restrictions or regulations.

    Republicans won’t hesitate to push for a national ban on abortion. Remember, they are the most hypocritical political party when it comes to moral and cultural authority.

  17. “For decades, Republicans have insisted that this issue is a state, not a federal, matter.”

    The ends: Criminalize abortion.

    The method: By any means necessary — including embracing an obvious inconsistency and contradiction.

    Proving, yet again, that the Left does not have a monopoly on being unprincipled, and on touting: The ends justifies the means.

  18. It is very evident that the major problem with this Republic is that the majority of the citizens fail to read, study and understand the United States Constitution.
    This Supreme Law of the United States, clearly express the powers that the three Constitutional branches of government has.
    Only Congress has the Constitutional power to create LAWS.
    It is the primary purpose of the Executive Branch to enforce these laws.
    It is the obligation of the Supreme Court to decide if, when in question, the laws made by Congress is are Constitutional.
    The 10th amendment clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
    We have allowed the governments (local, state and federal) to violate the Constitution for too many decades, it is time for the citizens to enforce the Constitution upon the governments.
    The Preamble to the Constitution -”We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
    The “clump of cells” fetus, babies that are aborted is in fact the Posterity (the future generations) of our Republic, which must be preserved.
    There are numerous forms of birth control that can be used to prevent women from becoming pregnant, including the morning after pill a safe and effective way to prevent pregnancy up to five days after sex.

    1. The 10th amendment clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”


      And the 9th amendment clearly states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

      And the 14th Amendment clearly states in part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      All forms of birth control, including emergency contraception sometimes fail. A pregnant woman or girl may develop complications. Even in a wanted pregnancy, an embryo or fetus may be diagnosed with conditions like trisomy 18, trisomy 13, total anencephaly, … that would lead a couple to decide to have an abortion.

      It is not your decision to make. The decisions is for a woman to make in consultation with her doctor and anyone else she wants to consult.

    2. “. . . the Posterity (the future generations) . . .”

      Sacrifice actual individuals now living, for the sake of those who might potentially exist in an indeterminate future.

      Gosh, that argument sounds familiar.

  19. It’s just a political statement for the base. You really can’t take any of these folks seriously — including this guy:

    “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act,” which would… acodify Roe v. Wade.
    Barack Obama

    111th Congress Jan. 3, 2009-Jan 3, 2011. Democratic House control. September 24, 2009 through February 4, 2010 60 Democratic caucus votes in the Senate — total Senate control.
    Nothing was done. The cynic in me concludes this wasn’t done in order for Democrats to use it as an issue for the base in successive Presidential elections.

    1. that is what I’ve pointed to others. if the Democrats so love aborition then why didnt they codify RvW when they had total control of Congress and President willing to sign such a bill

    2. I extremely agree, gentlemen. Most of the agitprop out of both sides in D.C. is just for fundraising purposes.

      And Professor Turley raises excellent questions (kudos to him) which lead to further questions. If the GOP can’t constitutionally pass a federal ban, how can the Democrats constitutionally pass a federal enforcement of abortion? And if the Democrats do pass such a law and the Court strikes it down, what then?

      I hope the pandemic doesn’t start looking like the good ol’ days.

Leave a Reply