FeaturedOpinionTrending Commentary

The Truth Behind The Kavanaugh and Mississippi Abortion News Stories in The Mainstream Media

On Thursday, the radical left decided to once again dig up information on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in an attempt to delegitimize him. The NY Times ran a piece that talked about the number of tips the FBI received on Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing. It was a gift from the radical mainstream media to the Democrats to give them a platform to speak out on Kavanaugh.

Democrats called the proceeding a sham, stating that the tip line was a fake tip line. They are hoping that Americans forget the fact that Blasey Ford had no merit to her story and that multiple instances of fake information were proven to have been shared. Of course, since when has the mainstream media and the Democrats cared about facts or truth.

I have no doubt that The NY Times has sat on this story for quite some time. Why? Because they needed it at the right time. They needed it when there were cases coming before the Supreme Court that they wanted to try to discredit the Supreme Court and specifically Justice Kavanaugh.

That’s where the Mississippi abortion case comes into the picture. While one side of the radical left was attacking Kavanaugh, the other side was taking shots at the Supreme Court and Roe v Wade.

It led The Washington Post to run this opinion piece from a professor at Georgetown University calling on Congress to essentially pass abortion as a federally protected right. Yes, they want to establish murdering a child in the womb as a federally protected right. God help us if that is the current mindset of the radical left.

Throughout the piece, the author shares misleading statements. He says, “Congress uses this power of “preemption” all the time — blocking states from having their own food and drug laws, employment rules, banking regulations and the like.” The truth is that states do have the power to enact food and drug laws, their own employment rules, business regulations, etc. He makes the argument that the federal government is the ultimate authority on everything, but the federal government simply sets minimum guidance and allows states to decide what is right for their own states from that minimum.

Or perhaps we can take a look at another misleading piece of information that he shared. He said:

Some in the Senate would try to filibuster the legislation, claiming 60 votes, not 50, is needed to pass it. But if there is ever a piece of legislation that merits a departure from the filibuster, this is pretty much it. Recall that it was the Republicans in the Senate who bypassed the filibuster when they confirmed President Donald Trump’s three nominees to the Supreme Court, including Barrett.

Now is probably a good time to remind everyone that the Democrats went to the “nuclear option” during the Obama administration long before Republicans did this. They moved to a simple majority to enact all of Obama’s nominees that were blocked by Republicans. To his credit, the Democrats did not bypass it for the Supreme Court.

The reason? They never needed to. They held the majority up until the Merrick Garland nomination and several Republicans supported both Obama nominations to the Supreme Court. Both of the justices placed on the court by Obama were approved by a 63-37 vote. Had they held the majority to force the Garland nomination, you bet they would have done it for him too.

So the radical left is running around creating chaos surrounding the Supreme Court attempting to delegitimize it. But why? After all, as the professor writes, Congress could, by simple majority, bypass the Supreme Court. What is the end goal.

Perhaps you have already forgotten about their conversations in regards to stacking the Supreme Court. On Wednesday, the commission that was established by President Joe Biden to look at the Supreme Court had another meeting. Several proposals are very popular with the group to send back to Biden’s desk.

One such proposal is that of term limits. According to SCOTUSBlog, there has been widespread support across the political aisle for term limits for Supreme Court justices. Who does that favor? The Democrats. Justice Clarence Thomas is the longest-serving member of the nation’s highest court. If they establish term limits for the Supreme Court, then Democrats could have a choice to replace both Thomas and Breyer, who they already want to replace.

It’s also worth mentioning that the commission is still very warm to the idea of stacking the court with additional justices. Remove one of the conservative justices, stack the court with 3-5 new justices and kiss America as we know it goodbye.

We all know we cannot trust the mainstream media or the radical left. They have an agenda and it is more than simply destroying Kavanaugh’s reputation and saving abortion. They are laying the foundation to change the Supreme Court right before our eyes.

Content syndicated from TheLibertyLoft.com with permission.

Related Articles

Back to top button

Get the Latest News Right in Your Inbox Each Morning:

Subscribe to the CDN Morning News Blast!

* indicates required

Email Format