(Natural News) The latest information drop from Judicial Watch has revealed that the University of Pittsburgh, thanks to funding from Tony Fauci, has been harvesting body parts from live babies just prior to aborting them. Large taxpayer grants sent by Fauci to the university (Pitt) via the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) … [Read More...]
by Allen Williams
Once again the Kansas legislature fails the people that it feigns to represent, denying its citizens the right to decide if the Kansas constitution includes the right to abortion demonstrating its continued worthlessness. The people of Kansas must live under a judicial oligarchy created and nurtured by the stupidity and malfeasance of this body of motley fools.
Self government is not a constitutional right in Kansas because the legislature and its lawyer interest group select candidates for the Supreme Court independent of the people ensuring authoritative control continues. Thus the people are prevented from saying ‘No’ to the special interests that want unlimited funding for substandard schools and the continued slaughter of the unborn for the baby body parts trafficking industries.
The Kansas legislature spends its time working against the very people that elected them pandering exclusively to a myriad of special interest groups including the American Federation of Teachers, Equality Kansas, KNEA, Kansas Association of School Boards, Johnson County Educators PAC, Kansas Farm Bureau, Kansas Advancing Women, Planned Parenthood, Sierra Club and a host of others denying the fundamental right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness as guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence. The people do not have the final say whether or not they wish to fund a government agenda as that power has been usurped by the courts through the ubiquitous ‘compelling interest’ of the state legalese..
The people are governed by a succession of thugs in a corrupt legislative process that earned a failing grade in a 2015 state integrity investigation. According to the Metrovoice, the state’s pro-abortion governor Laura Kelly has deep ties to Kansas City Corruption supporting the “sleazy underground” political interests that funded her campaign. Kelly has joined the ranks of other unsavory governors complicit in abetting the State Bar in packing the Kansas judiciary with odious candidates. The last thing these characters want is to relinquish control of the Kansas Supreme court to the people of Kansas.
There is a long history of Kansas being an abortion Mecca with the courts protecting Planned Parenthood’s right to pursue Title X funding genocide. The state legislature failed the people of Kansas by providing no effective means of impeaching corrupt judges other than removal by the state Supreme Court on the recommendation of the commission on judicial qualifications. This firmly places the state bar association in charge of who can be a judge so not only does the fox guard the chicken house but establishes the rules on how it should operate as well.
This same corrupt legislative body failed to support the one attorney general who discovered underage girls were being illegally taken for abortion and allowing the state’s ethics commission to remove this attorney general’s ability to practice law in the state. Thereby it chose to guarantee availability of abortion funds for favored individual’s election campaigns and to maintain the status quo. Because of the self serving actions of this worthless e body, people are coming from all over the country to abort their children especially from states whose stiffer regulations make abortion more difficult to obtain.
As of 2919, the Kansas Supreme Court again exercised its supervisory authority over the public, ruling that the state constitution contains the right to abortion stretching its legal reasoning beyond the limits of credibility to deny the people’s right to self government.
Kansas has subsequently joined the community of repressive nations where secret courts rule such as China, Iran and North Korea whose despots impose insufferable rule over their citizenry.
by Ed Condon
Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) raised concerns about membership in the Knights of Columbus while the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewed the candidacy of Brian C. Buescher, an Omaha-based lawyer nominated by President Trump to sit on the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.
Senators also asked whether belonging to the Catholic charitable organization could prevent judges from hearing cases “fairly and impartially.”
In written questions sent to Buescher by committee members Dec. 5, Sen. Hirono stated that “the Knights of Columbus has taken a number of extreme positions. For example, it was reportedly one of the top contributors to California’s Proposition 8 campaign to ban same-sex marriage.”
Hirono then asked Buescher if he would quit the group if he was confirmed “to avoid any appearance of bias.”
“The Knights of Columbus does not have the authority to take personal political positions on behalf of all of its approximately two million members,” Buescher responded.
“If confirmed, I will apply all provisions of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges regarding recusal and disqualification,” he said.
Kathleen Blomquist, spokesperson for the Knights of Columbus, told CNA that the senators’ questions echoed the kind of anti-Catholicism seen in previous generations of American history.
“Our country’s sad history of anti-Catholic bigotry contributed to the founding of the Knights of Columbus, and we are proud of the many Catholics who overcame this hurdle to contribute so greatly to our country,” Blomquist told CNA
“We were extremely disappointed to see that one’s commitment to Catholic principles through membership in the Knights of Columbus—a charitable organization that adheres to and promotes Catholic teachings—would be viewed as a disqualifier from public service in this day and age.”
President Trump nominated Buescher to serve on the U.S. District Court on Nov. 3. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Buescher’s nomination Nov. 28, sending written questions to him on Dec. 5.
The Knights of Columbus is active in 17 countries worldwide. In 2017, members carried out more than 75 million hours of volunteer work and raised more than $185 million for charitable purposes. Successive popes, including Pope Francis, have praisied the group for their charitable work and the manner in which they articulate Catholic faith and values.
In her questions to the nominee, Sen. Harris described the Knights as “an all-male society” and asked if Buescher was aware that the Knights of Columbus “opposed a woman’s right to choose” and were against “marriage equality” when he joined.
Responding to the senator’s questions, Buescher confirmed that he has been a member of the Knights since he was 18 years old, noting that his membership “has involved participation in charitable and community events in local Catholic parishes.”
“I do not recall if I was aware whether the Knights of Columbus had taken a position on the abortion issue when I joined at the age of 18,” he wrote in response.
Harris raised a statement from Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson, who said that abortion constituted “the killing of the innocent on a massive scale” and asked Buescher if he agreed with Anderson.
Buescher said he was not responsible for drafting statements or policies made by the Knights and that, as a federal judge, he would consider himself bound by judicial precedent regarding abortion.“I did not draft this language. If confirmed, I would be bound by precedent of the United States Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and would not be guided by statements made by others,” Buescher told the senator.
Blomquist told CNA that asking a judicial nominee to defend his membership of a major Catholic charitable organization is disturbing.
“We believe that membership in the Knights of Columbus, which helps everyday men put their Catholic faith into action, is worthy of commendation and not something a nominee for public office should be asked to defend," she said.
In 2014, Buescher ran as a candidate in the Republican primary
election for Nebraska attorney general. During that campaign he
described himself as “avidly pro-life” and said that opposition to
abortion was part of his “moral fabric.”
Buescher responded that “as a candidate for Nebraska Attorney General in 2014, I did what candidates for any major state or federal office do, which is to take political positions on a variety of issues of the day.”
“However, there is a difference between taking political positions as a candidate for elective office and serving as a federal judge. I believe a judge’s role and obligation is to apply the law without regard to any personal beliefs regarding the law,” Buescher wrote.
“If confirmed, I will faithfully apply all United States Supreme Court and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent on all issues, including Roe v. Wade."
Buescher also fielded questions from senators about Trump administration policy on Title X funding for clinics providing abortions and referrals, as well as on the application of anti-discrimination law to questions related to gender identity or sexual orientation.
The nominee underscored that, as a judge, it was not for him to advance personal or political opinions but to make fair and impartial rulings based on the law and judicial precedent.
If confirmed by the Senate, Buescher will fill the vacancy left by Judge Laurie Smith Camp, who assumed senior status - a kind of judicial semi-retirement - on Dec. 1.
This story has been updated.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton doubled down Wednesday on a claim Sen. Kamala Harris made regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s views on birth control that multiple fact-checkers have already determined to be false.
“I want to be sure we’re all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to birth-control pills as ‘abortion-inducing drugs,'” Clinton tweeted. “That set off a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should for you, too.”
“Kavanaugh didn’t use that term because he misunderstands the basic
science of birth control—the fact that birth control prevents
fertilization of eggs in the first place. He used that term because it’s
a dog whistle to the extreme right,” she added.
I want to be sure we're all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to birth-control pills as "abortion-inducing drugs." That set off a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should for you, too.
Kavanaugh didn't use that term because he misunderstands the basic science of birth control—the fact that birth control prevents fertilization of eggs in the first place. He used that term because it's a dog whistle to the extreme right.
The Washington Post awarded Harris with four Pinocchios for sharing a selectively edited video about Kavanaugh while arguing that he is “going after” birth control.
The California Democrat tweeted footage of an exchange Kavanaugh had with Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas during the judge’s confirmation hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The nominee answered by recounting the plaintiff priests’ position in the case regarding filling out a Department of Health and Human Services form to obtain a waiver from the contraception mandate, which, if accepted by HHS, required health insurance providers to offer the coverage free of charge to those who were interested.
Kavanaugh told Cruz, “They said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objecting to.”
Harris’s video omitted Kavanaugh saying, “they said,” making it appear that he was offering a statement about his views on the matter, and even birth control more broadly.
Harris wrote of the exchange in a tweet on Friday.
Kavanaugh chooses his words very carefully, and this is a dog whistle for going after birth control. He was nominated for the purpose of taking away a woman’s constitutionally protected right to make her own health care decisions. Make no mistake - this is about punishing women.
- 15,061 Retweets
- 30,443 likes
Here is Kavanaugh's full answer. There's no question that he uncritically used the term "abortion-inducing drugs," which is a dog whistle term used by extreme anti-choice groups to describe birth control.
Kavanaugh explained to Cruz that the reason he dissented in the case was based on the Supreme Court’s Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores decision, which found business owners have the right not to provide contraception coverage to employees if it runs contrary to their sincerely held religious beliefs.
It should be noted that Hobby Lobby’s owners did not object to providing birth control coverage, which they were in fact doing, but did object to providing contraceptives they believe cause abortions, including “morning-after pills” and two types of intrauterine devices.
There are 16 other FDA-approved contraception methods that the company did not object to, as they prevent the egg from being fertilized in the first place.
However, the four methods of contraception at issue in the case “may have the effect of preventing an already fertilized egg from developing any further by inhibiting its attachment to the uterus.” Thus, the concern was that by providing these abortifacients, they would be facilitating abortion.
After receiving significant criticism for her misleading tweet, Harris included Kavanaugh’s comments in context in a subsequent post, but argued, “There’s no question that he uncritically used the term ‘abortion-inducing drugs,’ which is a dog whistle term used by extreme anti-choice groups to describe birth control.”
The Washington Post was not buying the senator’s explanation.
“Harris’s decision to snip those crucial words (‘they said’) from her first post on the video is certainly troubling,” wrote Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler.
Regarding her follow up tweet, he added, “But there was no acknowledgment by Harris that the original tweet was misleading.”
Kessler concluded, “She earns Four Pinocchios — and her fellow Democrats should drop this talking point.”
Politifact also found Harris’ Twitter post in error.
“In Harris’ tweet, Kavanaugh appears to define contraception as abortion-inducing. But the video failed to include a crucial qualifier: ‘They said,’” Politifact reported.
“In fact, he was citing the definition of the religious group Priests for Life. He has not expressed his personal view,” the fact-checker added. “We rate this statement False.”
David French Retweeted Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton comes barreling back into the conversation with a timely reminder that she’s one of the more prolific liars in modern American politics.
David French added,
National Review’s David French chastised Clinton for grabbing onto Harris’ claim against Kavanaugh, which she should have known to be false.
He tweeted, “Hillary Clinton comes barreling back into the conversation with a timely reminder that she’s one of the more prolific liars in modern American politics.”