Kamala Harris’s Big Kavanaugh Lie
“Kavanaugh did not refer to contraceptives as ‘abortion-inducing drugs’ as his own view, he was summarizing Priests for Life’s case”
Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) is the latest Democrat to jump on the deception shuttle to, she hopes, the White House in 2020. She tweeted an 11-second video of soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in which he says, “Filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to.”
The problem? Kavanaugh was answering a question about and specifically citing the language of a specific case involving Priests for Life.
Harris takes deceptive editing to jaw-droppingly unethical depths by saying that Kavanaugh’s language, which is not actually his language at all, is a “dog whistle” for, she asserts, “going after birth control.”
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. pic.twitter.com/zkBjXzIvQI
— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) September 7, 2018
Setting aside the fact that the right is not “going after birth control,” missing from this clip are the key words just before this clip starts: “They said.”
“It was a technical matter of filing out a form in that case. But 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, objected to.”
Just to emphasize the level of dishonesty here from @KamalaHarris : She actually cuts out the “they said” portion of the sentence in her video to make it seem like he is giving his view. These people are shameless.
— AG (@AGHamilton29) September 7, 2018
Watch the full context as it happened in the hearings:
The Washington Free Beacon reports:
The “they” Kavanaugh is alluding to is the pro-life Catholic Priests for Life, who sued for a religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. When the case came before the Tenth Circuit, Kavanaugh dissented from the decision not to take up the case, and Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz asked during the hearing why he did so.
. . . Kavanaugh was summarizing the Priest for Life‘s position in that case, which is that the law made them complicit in the provision of birth control to their employees, contrary to Catholic teachings. Sure enough, the priest’s brief said they objected to “abortion-inducing products, contraception … sterilization, or related counseling.”
Kavanaugh made no comments during the hearing or in his opinion that suggesting he agreed with the priests’ assessment of some forms of birth control. Nor did he need to. In religious liberty cases, it’s irrelevant whether or not the judges believe the petitioner’s religious beliefs are logical or rational. Surely eight Supreme Court justices didn’t endorse the use of mind-altering drugs when they upheld Native Americans’ right to use them in religious ceremonies (although some of Ginsburg’s dissents make me wonder).
Harris tweeted such an onerously and grossly misleading portion of the statement that it literally starts in mid-sentence. This was no accident.
Kamala Harris was the AG for California. She knows Kavanaugh is specifically citing the terminology from the case. This isn’t just a mistake out of ignorance, it’s an intentional dishonest smear against BK. One of several from her this week. https://t.co/rAouyxodmm
— AG (@AGHamilton29) September 7, 2018
The Free Beacon continues:
Harris (or, let’s be honest, her staff) took the video of Kavanaugh’s comments and cut it off mid-sentence, and only left off the parts that indicated Kavanaugh was alluding to someone else’s beliefs.The video even capitalizes “Filling” in the video’s subtitles, making it seem like it was the start of a sentence.There’s no way they didn’t know what they were doing, and they did it with clear malice aforethought.
CNN unsurprisingly, and still on its race to the ratings bottom, ran with it.
https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1038466952157704193
This tweet is wildly misleading.
Kavanaugh did not refer to contraceptives as “abortion-inducing drugs” as his own view, he was summarizing Priests for Life’s case.
Very silly to suggest otherwise.https://t.co/OveJByQswc
— Senator Hatch Office (@senorrinhatch) September 7, 2018
Contrary to the first principle of propagandists, lies never become truth no matter how often they are told or how many people believe them. Eventually, the truth will out. “Eventually” in this case was the same day.
Harris had to have known that her lie would not stand, that it wouldn’t take long for the right to discover and point out her deception. But she, like many wallowing in the DC swamp, counts on her party’s base being too lazy to do their own research, too ensconced in their leftist bubble to hear “wrong thoughts,” and too caught up in the frenzy of Trump-deranged #Resistance and its mindless opposition to Kavanaugh that they will never learn that she is feeding them deliberate lies.
Nor will they, Harris is doubtlessly confident, discover that they are being purposefully manipulated, duped, and used. She knows the leftstream media and Big Tech are on board and that the vast majority of the Democrat base is unlikely to find out that she is deliberately deceiving them in order to stir up their anxiety, to feed their fears, to control and drive them.
UPDATE:
Faced with backlash over her deception, Harris tweeted the full context of the quote, but inexplicably doubled-down on her “dog whistle” nonsense that is belied by the context.
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. pic.twitter.com/PMbZzu8DqD
— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) September 8, 2018
Text from above tweet (lest it mysteriously disappear from her timeline when she realizes she just doubled-down on stupid):
“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.”
https://twitter.com/RajShah45/status/1038549411641651200
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
And indeed. The media played the part to the tee.
And here I thought Kamala had hit rock bottom with all of her questioning about “did you ever talk to anyone at that law firm about Trump?” Kavanaugh of course said “I don’t know the names of everyone who works at that law firm, so how can I answer?” Kamela implied over and over that she had some Sooper Sekrit Testimony she was gonna reveal that would “prove” he was lying. Even her allies said she had better come up with something or she would look like a fool.
So that night Kavanaugh reviewed who worked at the law firm, she asked again, this time he just said “no”. And she said “okay, end of that.” The entire line of questioning was a big batch of idiocy, her pretending to have something and then folding like a cheap lawn chair as soon as her bluff got called.
Because Obama worked out so well for the country we are all clamoring for an even more extreme country destroying version of him in Harris. How this woman can even be a top contender for the Democrat/Socialist/Fascist party presidential nominee tells you all you need to know about the horrifying state of that party and it’s braindead voters.
Kamala, Stuff Olives!
Kamala, Stuff Olives!
God, I pity her poor husband.
She probably hasn’t has sex in years.
I don’t know Harris’s marital status, but, I’ll submit that slowly committing seppuku with a dull butter knife, while listening to a record playing the “greatest hits” speeches of Elizabeth Warren, Bernard Sanders, Keith Ellison and Harris, herself, would be a merciful end, compared to the perpetual agony of living with this utterly miserable, mirthless, histrionic, arrogant, self-congratulatory, vain and sanctimonious harridan and termagant.
Kamala-toe’s only qualification for public office here in #Failifornia was being Willie Brown’s sex toy for a few years.
my Persian cat is smarter than she is.
…they will never learn that she is feeding them deliberate lies.
It doesn’t matter if they do, they would just applaud her for doing it.
The ‘end justifies the means’ is the first rule of leftist politics.
So true of the activist left, but these make up a relatively small portion of the left, even of the far left. Most of them are uninformed, incurious, and gullible–don’t follow politics closely and believe whatever they hear. This is the large swath of the left who believe that Republicans are evil, and etc. The portion to which you refer already know she’s lying and are, as you note, fine with it, even applaud it. It’s the “normals” on the left that would be horrified to learn how much they are lied to and how easily they are manipulated. It’s these people who have chosen, or once they learn the truth may choose, to #WalkAway
Yes, her usual act of being as dumb as Cher is camouflage. Crooked Kamela is as evil as Hillary. And much more dangerous than Sparky, whose major failing is his relatively benign delusion of adequacy.
But her classic “out-of-context” attack is successful, because it forces her victim to explain. In politics, explaining is almost as deadly as apologizing. Being known as a serial liar won’t hurt her at all; to leftoids, blatant lies mean she’s a “fighter”, not a dirtbag.
Until it does hurt her
Like Hillary……..
Hillary Collapses 9-11 Ceremony! – Dragged into Van
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3sfaOhA5Mss
She should have been dragged BY the van.
Kamala isn’t very smart. It’s entirely possible she didn’t lie – that she simply doesn’t understand the difference between describing someone else’s words accurately and believing those words yourself. After all, when you don’t believe someone else’s words (and you’re Kamala Harris), you sneer and try to put them in the worst possible light, right?
Please tell me you’re being SARCASTIC. PLEASE?
First off – Kameltoe is VERY SMART, only the EVIL KIND.
And she knows EXACTLY WHAT THE CASE WAS.
I’m just a layman (a gifted one, but I digress), I READ the dissent and understand it completely.
It had ZERO TO DO with thinking abortifacts are the same as birth control, or taking a womans right to contraception (which – if they’d use it effectively would REDUCE ABORTION).
What the case had to do with – was the plaintiffs objection to having to fill out an HHS Opt Out Form, in making them complicit in what they feel was a sin (and against their rights under the Religious Freedom Act – a test of which has already been upheld in SCOTUS).
Meanwhile – the LIES AND LAWLESSNESS (I AM SPARTACUS) – playing to the cheering mob of loony left idiots (who, unlike Harris, may not ACTUALLY KNOW ANY BETTER), whom I truly hope are the MINORITY of Dems, and the rest of the Dems with working brain cells and ANY COMMON SENSE (another phrase BHO MADE USELESS) will see right through this crap and either #WALKAWAY or #STAYHOME.
Breaking: People that equivocate about murdering babies are dishonest all around. Film at 11.
It really is a farce, a brittle peace held together by an unwillingness to address the issue in a frank and honest manner. It’s a 3rd rail and no one is allowed to point to the Emperor’s nakedness.
(BTW, can you hear conservative thought leaders muttering about hyperbole while millions of babies are murdered in the womb? I do. I had forgotten that was yet another hill they cautioned about dying on)
Anyways, the entire “woman’s right to control her body” is a lie. We know that intercourse carries a risk of pregnancy, yet we CHOOSE to accept that risk. We also know that birth control is not 100% effective, yet we CHOOSE to accept that risk too.
Two irresponsible choices… will women ever be responsible for the reproductive choices they make? But fine, liberty to make stupid choices and such. And at this point, it really IS about her body.
But not in a few weeks. In a few weeks ANOTHER life is on the table. How can anyone argue for their right to do what they want with their body while completely ignoring another life’s rights?
So they call it subhuman. Same as we called Native Americans subhuman savages to justify exterminating them. Same as we called Jews subhuman parasites to justify putting them in ovens. Same as we called Africans subhuman to justify slavery.
But our Rule of Law is predicated on reasonable doubt. We won’t execute a man if their is a shadow of doubt. Instead, we err on the side of caution.
Likewise, until we know with exact certainty when a human life begins, we should protect it, not kill it.
Oh, it is worse than you portray.
There are people in several states who have been convicted of homicide for terminating the development of a fetus without the permission of the mother. This is the result of criminal attack as well as medical procedures. The interesting thing is that the fetuses involved were terminated during the time period where the mother could legally terminate the pregnancy, through abortion. It is simply not legally sustainable. You can not kill a dead person and you can not be charged with homicide for cutting off a person’s big toe [unless it leads to that person’s death]. That is the big tell here. Abortion has nothing to do with when human life begins, but everything to do with allowing a woman to legal kill her child if she chooses, and without the permission of the child’s other parent.
It’s like Schrödinger’s cat. If the mother wants to keep it then it’s a person, but if she wants to get rid of it then it isn’t.
The current concept of abortion undermines the entire legal and moral fabric of Western society. What it does is grant the authority to terminate the life of an innocent human being without due process to a person based solely upon that person’s gender and relationship with the human being to be terminated. In other words, our society has granted a mother, and only a mother, the authority to kill her children for no reason at all. And, society has amply demonstrated through fetal homicide laws, that it considers an unborn child to be a human being.
Now, if society wishes to allow a single parent the authority to terminate the life of her child, that is within its power to do. But, it opens the door to legalizing the killing of a child at anytime during its life at the whim of its mother. Which is simply insane.
Harris is defending the wicked solution, “selective-child.” Pro-Choice is two choices too late.
Kamala Harris is an embarrassment to the legal profession. And to those who voted for her.
It’s true that he said “they said”, i.e. he was presenting their position, and she dishonestly left it out.
But it wouldn’t have mattered if he had been speaking for himself. Her attack would still have been dishonest, because he was not referring to contraceptives. Not even Priests For Life which he was quoting considers contraceptives to be abortifacients. Nobody does. Her claim that “abortion-inducing drugs” is a term used by extreme anti-choice groups to describe birth control is simply not true.
It’s true that Priests For Life also objected to having to help provide contraceptives but they did not confuse them with abortifacients. Even in the Catholic Church’s view, those are two separate categories of drugs, both of which it regards as sinful, but not nearly the same kind of sin. Thus Kavanaugh’s statement would not be startling even if he were giving his own opinion.
Anytime you hear the left use the term “Dog Whistle” what it means is that the person didn’t really say the thing they are butthurt about but they are gonna lie and say that they did so they can be butthurt anyway.
It’s not difficult to understand the panic. Trump has already corrected the loss of Scalia, is about to replace a swing vote with a conservative, and will probably get to replace Ginsberg.
That, and the record umber of court appointments are his legacy.
Far more important than executive orders, and even more important than laws.
What could have been her reason for this? It was so blatant and so easily refuted that it would not have served to turn the votes of Senators Collins and Murkowski, so why do it? IMHO she was shoring up her support in the Leftist base knowing that Kavanagh will be confirmed. Schumer has already taken heat from Leftist groups for not stopping Kavanagh’s confirmation. It’s all about damage control.
Makes one ponder the idea of using Kavanaugh’s confirmation as a means of laying the blame squarely on the ineffectiveness of Schemer in his position and the need to replace him. I guess there is the argument of “the devil you know,” but it is hard to imagine anyone worse who could step into his shoes. I wonder how well Schemer would fair if glowing compliments were laid upon him by the right for allowing Kavanaugh to be confirmed.
Look who is next in line if Schumer is ousted.
Turbin Dick Durbin
Every bit as evil as Chuckie, but not as intelligent.
like the hypocrisy of the Kmella, one of the reasons I voted for Trump was when the Khan’s stood up in front of the Democrats at their convention and admonished Trump to read the constitution, waving that book around, then it goes after Knavaugh for reading the same book at the inquisition.
What is it with the left that they fall so much in love with pinheads and liars? This woman is a liar and a fool. She also has nothing but contempt for those that support her because she is sure they don’t know when she’s lying.