Jane Fonda Thinks ‘Murder’ is a Way to Make Abortion Legal Again
BEHAR: Besides marching and protesting, what else do you suggest? FONDA: Well, it does involve murder.
Normally I ignore The View, but this is appalling and horrible. This absolutely crosses the line.
It involves Hanoi Jane.
Jane Fonda had a crazy appearance on The View today. How do we make abortion legal again? She thinks murder, which makes sense because abortion is murder.
Yes, Fonda suggests murdering pro-lifers and Republicans.
No wonder she thinks about murder:
JANE FONDA: We have experienced many decades now of having agency over our body, of being able to determine when and how many children to have. We know what that feels like. We know what that’s done for our lives. We’re not going back. I don’t care what the laws are. We’re not going back.
[Applause]
JOY BEHAR: The women will rise up.
SUNNY HOSTIN: That’s the activist!
BEHAR: That’s Jane.
HOSTIN: Speaking and she probably will get a Nobel Prize very, very soon.
FONDA: It’s true. It’s the truth. We’re not going to do it. We’re going to fight.
BEHAR: Besides marching and protesting, what else do you suggest?
FONDA: Well, it does involve murder.
LILY TOMLIN: Well, it doesn’t happen overnight. It’s not a miraculous – What did you say?
FONDA: Murder.
BEHAR: She’s kidding. Wait a second, she’s just kidding.
TOMLIN: Don’t say that.
BEHAR: Oh, you don’t know. They’ll pick up on that and just run with it.
TOMLIN: Yeah, that’s the worst.
BEHAR: She’s just kidding.
FONDA: [Shoots a disapproving look toward Behar]
[Laughter]
HOSTIN [nervous tone]: Let’s move on and talk about Jane’s activism which is legendary.
When asked for a solution to new pro-life laws around the country, Jane Fonda declares that they need to "murder" Republican politicians.
Joy Behar immediately jumps in to claim "she's just kidding," warning "they'll pick up on that and run with it."
Fonda gives a negative look. pic.twitter.com/17QJ4tP1pW— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) March 10, 2023
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
She’s so rich and famous, nothing touches her
Unfortunately
She should have been long gone with her Vietcong love affair
Never never will forgive her that
Murder comes so effortlessly to leftists. Inconvenient babies, inconvenient dissenters, inconvenient Jews – kill them all.
There has GOT to be a vacancy in the Biden cabinet for this chick.
Word to the wise, Jane — absolutely nobody would miss Gina Raimondo.
Chick?
CHICK?!???
You BEAST!
I’m sorry.
“Chickerella.”
Single issue voter.
Fat Bastard: Get in my belly!
Abortion is in fact legal. States vary. I’d assume they’ll eventually converge on a time limit that corresponds to when a fetus can be portrayed as cute, in sonogram or whatever, as it has in Europe, where the issue isn’t even contentious.
What kind of fetus?
A collection of cells that had meaningless value until they can be groomed by democrats.
I know you’re being facetious, but I was legitimately asking what kind of fetus to see if he could tell me which species he was talking about. Calling a human baby a “fetus” is the first step towards taking away that baby’s humanity and, thus, makes it easier for society to kill a baby.
Bullshit. “Foetus” is simply the correct term for a baby between when it has taken recognizable shape and when it is born, just as “newborn” is the correct term after it is born.
Jane has been on my bad list since I was a kid during Vietnam
If only she could blame her 85 year old hatred on the plastic surgery.
“Jane’s activism is legendary” as in Treasonous!
When this dried up old broad dies, she’ll be burning in Hell!
Read Dante’s _Inferno_. Traitors don’t burn in hell, they are frozen up to their necks in ice. Forever.
Let’s move on and talk about Jane’s activism which involves murder and will get her a Nobel Prize very, very soon. (There’s that communist activism we’ve come to expect over the years.)
“They’ll pick up on that and just run with it.” (Don’t tell ‘em what you really mean, Jane!)
Another mask slipped moment, they deserve to be ridiculed for this. But let’s not forget this either because this shows they would do it if they think they could get away with it.
American, traitor, bitch.
Quite seriously isn’t this a publicly made incitement to terroristic behavior?
No, it isn’t. Incitement means speech that is both (1) subjectively intended and (2) objectively likely to cause someone hearing it to (3) immediately commit a crime. All three elements are required; none are present here. Therefore it is not incitement; and it is protected free speech.
18 U.S. Code § 373 – Solicitation to commit a crime of violence
Yes! An equal rite to abort a “burden” in darkness, under a veil of privacy, without the glare of police sirens and lights illuminating your victim(s). Social justice, Forward!
Planned Parenthood, planned parent/hood, planned peoplehood perchance planned Jewhood, with precedents, too. All this and more is viable under diversity [dogma] (i.e. class-disordered ideology).
FONDA: Well, it does involve murder.
FONDA: Murder.
And if anyone on the Right had said something like that the howls of outrage from the leftist liberals would be deafening. As it is the silence of the crickets is the only thing we hear from Chuck and the rest of the hypocrites democrats.
Janes Revenge
Maybe she’s financially supporting them
The woman appears to be mentally unhinged
probably dates back to what she was smoking in ‘Nam
Do they think it’s the liberals who have all the guns?
Women could just close their legs. Everyone does realize the purpose of sex is procreation right? I know that’s radical. Sure it’s pleasurable, but the act itself has a goal when allowed to take its normal course. It’s why homosexuality will always be a perversion. It is not normal to put your thing in a man’s pooper. That’s science. That’s reality.
I was in college and The Sally Jesse Rachial show came on. The boring teacher (AKA Ben Stein) from Ferris Bueller was on. He made what seemed to me a non controversial statement, “We need to make sure our young men understand that every time they have sex the girl might get pregnant”.
Sally was aghast and responded “I don’t want to put that kind of burden on my son!”
Lefties hate to be burdened with facts and truth.
In point of fact a woman can only get pregnant a couple days before ovulation, during ovulation and a couple days after ovulation. Roughly 10 days a month max. So the other 2/3 of the month they can’t get pregnant because there aren’t any eggs present to become fertilized.
Women control access to sex. Outside use of force, men have zero control over sexual activity. If women refused sex unless their partner wore a condom and they themselves were on birth control the rate of unwanted pregnancy would plunge dramatically.
Of course that would require people to be disciplined and to take full accountability for their own actions. Neither is very likely in our modern culture where personal responsibility is anathema to the population.
Fine. You are very smart
However, if you can tell when a woman is ovulating by looking at her you are a better man than I. If you don’t assume that the sex act may produce a child you are acting as a child yourself. You will find yourself in the role of Ross from Friends say “How did that happen?” The main advice I have given to my sons is don’t have sex with a woman you don’t want to have to deal with for the rest of your life.
Nor sure why the disdain as this is basic info about the world provided by Parents and HS sex ED. Sperm live five days, ovulation produces eggs which live another 2 days max. That narrows the window for pregnancy significantly.
Your advice to your Sons is valid; be circumspect in choosing a partner and wear a condom. However it remains true that a woman is able to track to high degree of certainty her ovulation and thus risk of pregnancy. If she avoids sex during this period she will not become pregnant. Particularly so when she is on birth control and requires her partner to wear a condom.
My point is that far from being helpless women are, outside use of force, in 100% control of pregnancy.
There is no reply button to commochiefs last reply so I am replying here.
First, I never said that women don’t have good control of pregnancy risks. I was talking about men’s control. You do over state it with the 100% unless you are talking about complete abstinence. It is true that the percentage is pretty high with a responsible woman. However, we are not talking about responsible women.
I was talking about being a man that doesn’t want to be involved with creating a life that might be killed despite their wishes. The disdain was just irritation that you didn’t understand that. I suppose I wasn’t clear enough.
Martin,
Every woman is absolutely in 100% control of both pregnancy and abortion. Including one’s Spouse. Men, for all practical purposes have zero control over whether a woman chooses to to either become pregnant or whether that pregnancy is aborted or whether a child is carried to term.
She chooses whether she is sexually active, with whom and when. She chooses whether she available herself of one of the 2 Dozen plus forms of birth control available to women. She chooses whether to track her ovulation cycle. She chooses whether to require her partner to wear a condom. She chooses whether to use morning after pill or to have an abortion.
My point is that men are at the mercy of the decisions made by women when it comes to sex and reproduction. Which seems to correlate with your own point. As men it is incumbent upon us to be very circumspect in with whom we choose as potential sexual partners. Their character matters as much or more than arousal because ultimately they control what happens.
Right, cuz paying child support is so much better.
Oh yeah, remember? You made sure your son had no say in it, either way.
Well at least she is still able to admit that killing conservatives, Republicans and other pro-lifers is murder.
Soon she will change her mind since she is looking for a Final Solution, to coin a phrase, to the problem of people that oppose abortion.
Hanoi Jane should have been hanged back in the seventies for her treason. She wants again proves that she’s nothing but a traitor and un-American.
I liked her in Barbarella. She was a sex goddess in those days. Not so much now,
I despised her before, during and after she made Barbarella.
h/t Cheech and Chong
“Let’s go see a horror movie.”
“Oh, wow, man! Like, with Jane Fonda?”
“No, man. I said a horror movie, not a whore movie!”
Oh, man!”
She hates the movie, and wishes every copy on the face of the earth would vanish.
I have secreted over a dozen copies with trusted friends, and if anything suspicious happens to me, they will be simultaneously released to Russian pirate/porn sites.
All I say is bring it.
Fonda is at least being honest in where things are heading. Oh, wait, let me restate, where things already are. She’s admitting to their actual intentions. They tried to kill Steve Scalise, remember.
We’re in a civil war, the powers just don’t want to call it a civil war.
And one side in this war refuses to accept the reality of it. The situation will be direly late before we finally get it
> “And one side in this war refuses to accept the reality of it. The situation will be direly late before we finally get it”
It’s not that. It’s because the left and the right look at violence differently. To the left violence is a dial… it can be turned up or down. To the right it’s a switch… on, or off. We’re reluctant because we know where this leads. Once that switch gets flipped it can’t be unflipped until the violence burns itself out. It will end up being a real insurrection, not a group of loudmouths going on a tour of the Capitol but an armed guerilla war involving millions upon millions of heavily-armed (and may trained) fighters who are scattered throughout the population. It’ll be like “The Troubles” of Northern Ireland… times a thousand. Ugly. Personally, I don’t want to see that.
I’ve heard some say what we’re in right now is a “Cold Civil War,” and I think that’s as good a term as any. Like the Cold War it stays cold because the consequences of escalation are terrifying. But I don’t think the left understands that. They’ll keep pushing until something snaps.
She should late term abort herself.
Well, she was very much into murdering our troops when having a wonderful time in Hanoi, so I see nothing surprising that she again finds murder an acceptable activity.
Could we get a comment on Ms. Fonda’s remarks from ABC’s Standards and Practices office?
Is ABC willing to let guests on its programs advocate political violence? Are there any guidelines for when that is accepted or not?
Is there any difference between her words to incite and the bleeding Trump head held by Kathy Griffin?
It was claimed that just the visage of Trump and his words ‘go peacefully’ were enough to trigger an unbalanced individual and J6 Committee was born.
Now for Hollywood committee?
No, there is no difference; both are protected speech.
“Let’s move on and talk about Jane’s
activismtreason which is legendary.”FIFY
JF is a narcissist, not a Mensa candidate. Only a few actors can walk and chew gum and most will do anything for fame.
Her anti-war opinion I forgive, her aiding and abetting the enemy damns her forever. Jane’s pampered ego with psychopathic tendencies was on full display and I suspect she won’t be allowed to shill for the movie much more.
Jane who? SMH
Frances Ford Seymour fonda & Henry fonda made a mistake by not aborting their child
so anyone advocating the same fate for hanoi jane can get away with it by saying “just kidding”?. then i advocate the same fate for hanoi jane!!! (just kidding)