Lawsuit: Harvard Professor Assaults Jewish Woman After She Stands Up to Anti-Israel Bullies

A Jewish-American woman is suing the Harvard Club of New York City and a Harvard University professor for assault after she rose to ask a question following a presentation by a pro-Palestinian lecturer.

The Harvard Club not only forced Vanesa Levine, 28, to leave the February 2019 event, but later rescinded her membership, she says.

The social club was founded in 1887 and, according to its website, is intended to be a “warm and friendly place” for Harvard alumni to connect.

In her complaint filed in New York state court at the end of last month, Levine alleges that Harvard finance professor Faris Mousa Saah assaulted, slandered and libeled her following a lecture by Rashid Khalidi called, “The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine.”

Khalidi is a former media officer with the Palestinian Liberation Organization.

TRENDING: Ilhan Omar Pushes ‘Truly Ignorant Idea’: Give GI Bill Benefits to Americans Who Never Served

According to Levine’s court filing, she sought to ask Khalidi following his talk how peace could be achieved between Palestinians and Jews, if Palestinian children are taught from a young age to “support terrorism against Jews and Israelis, jihad, and not to recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel.”

The audience became “mob-like” in shouting her down, and Saah allegedly forcefully grabbed Levine by the arm while trying to wrestle the microphone from her, Levine’s suit says.

Levine also claims Saah called her a “whore” in Arabic.

She says she immediately told the room that the professor had just called her a whore.

Do you believe Levine is a victim of anti-Semitism?

0% (0 Votes)

0% (0 Votes)

According to the suit, Levine’s mother — who was born and raised in Israel and understands Arabic — asked, “Who do you think you are calling my daughter a whore?”

Saah then allegedly turned his fury against the mother.

Levine’s attorney, Jeffrey K. Levine, told The Western Journal the professor called her the “daughter of a whore” in Arabic.

Asked why his client attended the lecture, Levine said that she wants “peace for the region” and that she and her mother “were very interested in what the other side had to say.”

Vanesa Levine was eventually able to ask her question, but then Harvard Club security asked both women to leave, the suit says.

RELATED: Blood Libel: Tlaib Shares Tweet Falsely Accusing Jews of Murder Just Before Holocaust Remembrance Day

After Levine left the club, she was filmed talking about the incident and the next day uploaded the video to Facebook.

“All I had was a simple question, and it took seven minutes to get the question across because every time I was talking, they kept booing me,” Levine said.

 

“So apparently one side is very hateful, the other one is looking for answers and for solutions, and I’m sure you can figure out which side is [which],” she concluded.

The person filming Levine can be heard off camera near the end of the video adding, “I think it’s very sad that in a free country you’re not allowed to have free speech.”

“That is extremely sad, because where go we do from here. Maybe we move to Israel,” the person added.

The New York Post reported that the Harvard Club’s board of trustees demanded that Levine take down her Facebook video, which she refused to do.

In July, the board then voted to pull her membership following a hearing “in which they allegedly dismissed her assault claim, even ignoring an internal report from club security confirming Levine’s version of events, she said in court papers,” according to The Post.

In a statement to The Western Journal, Irene Reidy, director of marketing and communications for the Harvard Club of New York City, said, “Ms. Levine disrupted a Club program. She was subsequently removed from membership in accordance with the Club’s bylaws.”

For his part, Saah told the Post, “I don’t remember having been at the lecture.”

“There’s not a single word of accuracy in any of that,” he added, referring to the assault accusations.

Jeffrey Levine responded that the professor’s account does not add up.

“Saah was also quoted in the Post as saying, everything my client said was a lie. Well, if you don’t remember even being there, then you don’t remember,” Levine said.

“How can Saah credibly say my client lied about what happened at the lecture while at the same time state he has no recollection of even being at the lecture?” the attorney asked. “It’s either he remembers being at the lecture and can retell what did or did not occur, or he does not remember being at the lecture and consequently can’t truthfully comment one way or the other because he can’t remember. Saah cannot have it both ways.”

“At the time of his depositions, it will be very enlightening to see how he’s going to testify under oath,” Levine said.

Vanesa Levine is seeking reinstatement in the Harvard Club and unspecified financial damages for the emotional and physical injuries she says she suffered.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via The Western Journal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com

Ohio State Lawmakers Unanimously Pass Campus ‘Free Speech’ Bill, Professors Oppose The Effort

Ohio State Lawmakers Unanimously Pass Campus ‘Free Speech’ Bill, Professors Oppose The Effort

Authored by Jon Street vioa CampusReform.org,

The Ohio state senate unanimously passed a bill that would, among other provisions, ban free speech zones on the state’s college campuses. 

Ohio Senate Bill 40, or the “Forming Open and Robust University Minds Act,” was introduced by state Sens. Andrew Brenner and Rob McColley, both Republicans. The bill came as Campus Reform has reported on multiple schools banning or otherwise charging exorbitant security fees for conservative speakers to visit not only college campuses in Ohio but across the country.

The legislation, if signed into law, would ban "free speech zones," prevent colleges from prohibiting "noncommercial expressive activity," as well as preventing colleges from imposing security fees "based on the content of their expression, the content of the expression of their invited guest, or the anticipated reaction to an invited guest’s expression." The bill would also prevent colleges from "creat[ing] ‘free speech zones’ or designat[ing] other outdoor areas of campuses where expressive activities are prohibited."

“In seeing what was going on in other states and other universities throughout the United States, we felt [the bill] was needed to be brought here to Ohio so we can protect the freedom of speech for students on campus," Brenner said, according to the Columbus Dispatch

David Jackson of the Ohio chapter of the American Association of University Professors, opposed the bill. 

“There is a substantial difference between banning an idea and disallowing a controversial speaker that would cause massive disruption and create crowds that campus police could not control," Jackson told the Dispatch.

James Smith, chairman of the Ohio State University Young Americans for Freedom, applauded the bill.

“I admire Rep. Brenner’s continued fight for institutional reform affecting the ways speakers are (and sometimes aren’t) allowed to speak on Ohio college campuses. I believe FORUM is a step in the right direction for Ohio educational policy and will, if passed, help to make college campuses more of a marketplace for ideas and less dominated by leftist groupthink," Smith said, according to YAF.


Tyler Durden

Wed, 02/12/2020 – 14:09

via ZeroHedge News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.zerohedge.com/fullrss2.xml

Justin Danhof: Google Is the Biggest Bully in Silicon Valley

In a recent article for Issues & Insights, Justin Danhof examines the power that search giant Google wields and how it could be used to influence elections. According to Danhof, “It is hard to father a greater bully than Google.”

In a recent article for Issues & Insights titled “When The Bully Controls The Search Engine,” Justin Danhof examines the control and power that search giant Google wields and how it could be utilized to influence elections. The article begins by noting the shocked reaction from Google employees following the election of President Trump in 2016, as documented in Breitbart News’ exclusive publication of the Google Tape.

The article notes that all Americans should be frightened by the fact that any company has the power to heavily influence a national election. It’s further noted that the 2016 election is just one example of Google attempting to squash conservative values, in recent years a number of conservative Google employees have spoken out about their experiences at the firm. Breitbart News covered this in-depth in the Rebels of Google series.

Danhof also spoke with conservative Google employees after posing a question to Eric Schmidt, the former chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet in 2016:

In recent years, it is hard to fathom a greater bully than Google. During its first shareholder meeting following Trump’s victory, I asked Eric Schmidt, then chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, if conservatives and their worldviews were welcome at the company. Schmidt dismissed my question by wildly claiming that everyone at the company – and indeed the collective tech industry – was in unanimous agreement politically and philosophically. After the meeting, however, a strange thing happened: I started to receive emails from “closeted” conservative Google employees thanking me for standing up for them. I remember thinking that these emails sounded like they were written by folks in prison.

Not long after the shareholder meeting, Google engineer James Damore penned his now-famous memo calling on the company to take strides in achieving true diversity rather than just hiring and promoting based on skin color and race. Google, ever the oppressor, fired him. The message was clear: dissent is not welcome in Mountain View, California.

Danhof notes that Google’s ideological streak has not just been applied to inner company culture but has extended as far as its business practices, as can be seen in the number of lawsuits the firm has faced in recent years:

In the backdrop of these public-facing events, a case has been winding its way through the courts which further demonstrates Google’s tyrannical tendencies. Last November, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Google v. Oracle. The facts of the case are basic and not much in dispute. Google allegedly stole thousands of lines of code from Oracle’s Java program for its Android operating system. It’s that simple. What’s Google’s defense for doing so? It claims that Oracle shouldn’t be allowed to copyright Java. Google further asserts that its theft fits into copyright exceptions, including “fair use” and “transformative use.” These are absurd arguments, but they trend with Google’s oppressive tactics specifically, and the left’s disdain for private property generally.

Liberals have long abhorred private property, so it is unsurprising that much of the tech industry is lining up behind Google. This is all despite Google’s sordid history of appropriating other tech competitors’ work products.

In 2013, Google, along with Cisco Systems, paid TiVo nearly $500 million to settle a copyright infringement lawsuit concerning the company’s DVR technology. Two years before that, the U.S. Department of Justice levied a $500 million fine against Google for abetting piracy. Earlier this month, Sonos sued Google in federal court alleging that Google had stolen five of its patents.

In Danhof’s opinion, it is important for the Supreme Court to affirm Oracle’s copyright on Java. If it decides otherwise, it could embolden Google, which is already the biggest bully in Silicon Valley.

Read the full article in Issues & Insights here.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Wisconsin School District Abandons ‘A-F’ Grading Scale to Prevent Stress

A school district in Madison, Wisconsin, has made the controversial decision to abandon the common “A to F” grading system based in favor of a system that is “kinder” to students. Now, top students will be graded as “exceeding” while failing students will be “emerging.”

According to a report by the College Fix, the Madison Metropolitan School District has announced that they are doing away with the traditional “A-F” grading system in favor of a new system that is gentle on students.

The report, which was written by Christian Schneider, a parent in the school district, claims that the district has introduced four new categories to replace the traditional grading scale. Schneider noticed that his second-grade daughter’s report card featured words like “exceeding” and “emerging” instead of letter grades.

“Exceeding” – Student consistently exceeds grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Meeting” – Student consistently meets grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Developing” – Student is developing understanding and is approaching grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Emerging” – Student begins to show initial understanding of grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

Schneider points out that the new grading system doesn’t apply directly to a student’s performance in each subject. Instead, students are graded on their ability to work in groups and tell stories.

The two scales don’t match up largely because the new grades assigned don’t address a specific class or subject – they deal mostly with behavior. The “Exceeding-Emerging” scale applies to 40 different classifications. Instead of being graded on “math” or “science,” my daughter is being graded on “Tells a story or describes an experience,” “cooperates with partners and in groups,” and “understands and identifies stages in the life cycle of insects.”

Breitbart News reported in January 2019 that a guest speaker at American University told faculty members that it was racist to judge the quality of a student’s writing when grading a paper. The guest speaker, a professor in the University of Washington system, argued that traditional grading practices perpetuate “white supremacy.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Father Reunited with Daughter Kidnapped in Front of Him in Driveway

Police returned Lester Mejia’s daughter to him just hours after she was abducted from their driveway on Monday.

“It was anguish not knowing what was happening to my daughter,” Mejia told reporters on Monday night. At approximately 6 a.m., he had fastened his daughter into her car seat but forgotten his keys. As he ran into the house to retrieve them, he heard her scream.

Mejia emerged to see a black Honda with Texas license plates driving away with his little girl. He immediately jumped into his car and followed the vehicle along highway I-75, but was forced to give up pursuit when he realized he had left his phone behind.

The frantic dad rushed home to contact authorities, and an Amber Alert was issued by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) soon after. Fortunately, police soon spotted the vehicle driving through Tallahassee. FDLE agents and Florida Highway Patrol troopers stopped the vehicle and retrieved the child. Four adults were arrested — three men and one woman. In an official Facebook post, the FDLE said:

When the AMBER Alert went out, FDLE agents took to the air in our Cessna, searching for the suspects’ vehicle. Upon locating the vehicle, they radioed ahead to FDLE’s Tallahassee Regional Operations Center, who notified other law enforcement in the Tallahassee area of the suspects’ location. FDLE agents and Florida Highway Patrol troopers who were in the area looking for the missing child were then able to stop the vehicle on I-10 in Tallahassee, apprehending the suspects and safely recovering the child.

Of course, little Madeline “was scared,” Lt. Kim Montes said, calling it a “very traumatic” experience for the three-year old. Her father, however, is just grateful. “I’m happy for my baby coming back,” he said.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Where’s Hunter? Until Recently, On the Board of the Left’s Premier National Security Network 

Hunter Biden

If Joe Biden’s presidential campaign collapses in the coming weeks, as looks increasingly likely, it will be in part because of stories like this.

In 2011, two years into his father’s term as vice president, Hunter Biden was appointed by the Truman National Security Project, a left-leaning foreign policy network, to its board of directors. The younger Biden was, at the time, one of just six members of the governing board, where he served alongside the organization’s founder and CEO, Rachel Kleinfeld, and a handful of corporate leaders. He had no obvious qualifications for the position.

As the Truman Project expanded, Democratic national security heavyweights including Jake Sullivan, Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy guru who ran the Department of Policy Planning during her tenure at Foggy Bottom; Matthew Spence, a Defense Department veteran who served as a senior aide to Obama national security adviser Tom Donilon; and Steve Israel, the former Democratic congressman and head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, eventually joined Biden on the board.

A cached version of the organization’s website shows that Biden rose to the position of vice chairman of the board, serving there until at least March of 2019. It is not clear precisely when—or why—Biden stepped down from the board, and the Truman Project did not respond to requests for comment. But during his tenure on the board, according to the New Yorker, he was in and out of drug rehabilitation facilities several times and, in 2014, joined the board of the Ukrainian gas giant Burisma and was discharged from the U.S. Navy after he failed a drug test. He later claimed that cigarettes he had smoked outside a bar may have been, unbeknownst to him, laced with cocaine.

Founded in 2004 by Kleinfeld, a Yale University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, the Truman National Security Project was intended to mirror conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. Funded by the Ploughshares Fund, the organization awards dozens of fellowships every year and aims to mentor a new generation of Democratic foreign policy leaders.

Kleinfeld, who left the organization in 2013 and now serves as a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, did not respond to a request for comment. The Truman National Security Project did not return multiple requests for comment. A lawyer for Hunter Biden did not respond to a request for comment. A spokeswoman for John P. Driscoll, the chairman of the board of the Truman National Security Project, did not respond to a series of questions including why Biden was appointed to the board and when he stepped down from the position.

Kleinfeld has, however, written about her deep concern about corruption in Ukraine, writing in 2014, the year Biden joined Burisma’s board, that "Iraq’s fall on the heels of Ukraine’s collapse should be compelling. Curbing corruption before it tips into Kalashnikov-carrying rebels and public crucifixions is good security policy. And we need to get better at it."

Biden was appointed to the Burisma board as the oil and gas giant faced a slew of corruption investigations involving its owner, Mikhail Zlochevsky, who was facing a money laundering investigation.

During Biden’s time on the board of the Truman Project, the organization joined a network of other left-leaning national-security oriented outlets with which it is closely linked, decried the Trump administration’s foreign policy initiatives and called for the resignation of Attorney General William Barr. Defend American Democracy, which identifies the Truman National Security Project as a "partner organization," ran a national ad urging Americans to "hold the president accountable for abusing his office and risking national security for his own gain."

Biden wasn’t the organization’s only connection to Burisma. Throughout his tenure on the board he sat alongside Sally Painter, the chief operating officer of the Washington, D.C., lobbying firm Blue Star Strategies, which was hired by Burisma to improve the company’s image in the United States. A November Wall Street Journal report detailed how Painter’s colleague, Karen Tramontano, used Biden’s name in an effort to secure meetings with senior State Department officials, though the paper said it was not clear "whether the younger Mr. Biden knew his name was being used by Blue Star in its contacts with State Department officials on Burisma’s behalf in early 2016."

While it is unclear when, exactly, Burisma retained Blue Star Strategies, Biden and Painter were serving together on the Truman board while Blue Star was working for Burisma.

As a tax-exempt organization, the Truman National Security Project is required to file tax returns indicating whether any of its officers or key employees have a "business relationship" with any others. Though Burisma tapped Painter’s public relations outfit while Biden was a member of the board, the Truman Project answered "no." It further indicated that its officers had been briefed on their duty to disclose any conflicts of interest and that it was "regularly and consistently" monitoring compliance with the policy.

Michael Breen, president and CEO of Human Rights First, who served as president and CEO of the Truman Project when the tax returns were filed, and who is identified on them as the individual who possesses the organization’s books and records, did not respond to phone calls or emails seeking comment.

Truman fellows can now be found throughout the D.C. foreign policy establishment. Former secretary of state Madeleine Albright; Senators Chris Coons (D., Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D., Ill.) and Kamala Harris (D., Calif.); and former undersecretary of defense for policy Michele Flournoy are board members of its sister organization, the Truman Center for National Policy.

The Truman National Security Project’s current president and CEO, Jenna Ben-Yehuda, whose contact information is not publicly listed on the organization’s website, did not respond to a request via Twitter for an appropriate point of contact for media inquiries. A page listing the group’s membership is "currently under construction," according to the group’s website, and the email address listed for press inquiries was inoperative.

On Tuesday—even before his disappointing fifth place finish in New Hampshire—Joe Biden fled the state for South Carolina, where he is hoping African-American voters will revive his flagging campaign. If that hope proves futile, it will be in part because of the perception that, as vice president, Biden either used his name and influence to help friends and family or looked the other way while they did so at places like Burisma and the Truman National Security Project.

The post Where’s Hunter? Until Recently, On the Board of the Left’s Premier National Security Network  appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com

SHIDELER: Stop Releasing Jihadists From Prison

A rash of knife attacks by recently released terrorists has put Britain on edge and serves as a reminder that the United States needs to do more itself to prepare for the imminent release from prison of convicted terrorists. In order to avoid the current problems of the British government, which is rushing to pass emergency legislation, American lawmakers should take advantage of our federalist system to bring state and local resources to play in tracking released terrorists.

The British government is struggling to address the threat from dozens of convicted jihadi terrorists who are due to be released within months. Britain has seen several high-profile attacks from freed terrorists who received early release before serving even half their sentences.

Earlier this month, 20-year old Sudesh Amman strapped on a fake explosive vest before launching a knife attack on Streatham High Road in London. Despite being under direct police surveillance during the attack, the jihadist critically wounded one person. Amman had previously been sentenced to three years and four months in prison for multiple terrorism offenses in November 2018 related to distributing Islamic State propaganda.

The attack methodology of a fake suicide bomb vest and knives directly mirrored that of Usman Khan, another convicted terrorist, who in November 2019 killed two people on London Bridge. Prior to the attack, authorities had considered Khan a model rehabilitated prisoner. Khan was attending a deradicalization conference minutes before he launched his attack.

Official data show that the British government has reconvicted an additional six British jihadi terrorists released from prison between 2013 and 2019.

This newest wave of attacks is a reminder that the U.S. also faces a risk from previously convicted terrorists who are released; various “rehabilitation” schemes are highly suspect.

Aimen Dean, a former al-Qaeda member who later spied for Britain’s MI6, told The Telegraph, “there is no such thing as a rehabilitated jihadist.” Morton Storm, a Danish former al-Qaeda member who later helped to betray terrorist leader Anwar al-Awlaki to the CIA, agrees. Rehabilitation efforts, he says, ignore that jihadis are not confused or mentally ill, but are adherents of an ideology to which they are committed. “[D]eradicalizing the jihadists doesn’t work, because they’re religiously motivated,” Storm told the Associated Press in 2017, in response to a Danish rehabilitation program.

Nearly two decades after 9/11, even high-level terrorist leaders facing long sentences are becoming eligible for parole and may even complete their full sentences. While there is very little information available on recidivism rates among convicted terrorists, the recidivism rate of jihadist fighters released from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility was nearly 17% in 2018, with another 13% also suspected of returning to active terrorism.

In 2017, a National Counterterrorism Center report noted, “more than 90 homegrown violent extremists incarcerated in the U.S. who are due to be released in the next five years will probably re-engage in terrorist activity.”

In order to address this challenge, U.S. federal, state, and local law enforcement need tools in order to prepare for released terrorists. One such tool would be a terrorism registry, which would provide law enforcement the ability to track the location of former terrorists in the same way police and the public can keep tabs on sex offenders — with legal sanction for failure to register. Louisiana successfully passed the first terrorism offender registry law in 2019, and several states have expressed interest in following suit.

A nation-wide network has also been proposed by Patrick Dunleavy, a specialist on terrorist activity in the prison system. Realistically, such a proposal requires both federal assistance with information-sharing, as well as state laws to establish the registries and allow state authorities to enforce them.

A nationwide system of state terrorism registries would also take advantage of American federalism, utilizing state and local law enforcement to help prevent federal counterterrorism agents from being overwhelmed with keeping tabs on prior offenders.

Public registries protect and empower the individual citizen without need for government controls. The Department of Justice maintains a public sex offender registry, which private companies often use as a database for websites and apps that alert citizens about rapists, stalkers, and molesters living in their neighborhoods.

Pseudoscience models of rehabilitation treat convicted terrorists as emotionally stunted unfortunates rather than committed ideologues willing to use violence for a political purpose. This has proven to be a disaster. Instead, the U.S. should implement a registry system for terrorists, bringing state and local law enforcement resources, as well as private enterprise, to bear and improving communication and cooperation for law enforcement in order to ensure that terrorist re-offenders do not slip through the net.

 

Kyle Shideler is the Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy.

via The Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com

Actress Patricia Heaton Rips Democratic Party And Its ‘Barbaric’ Abortion Platform

On Wednesday, actress and pro-life advocate Patricia Heaton tore into the Democratic Party for its increasingly radical position on the issue of abortion and its open shunning of pro-lifers.

“I don’t understand why pro-life people want to know if they are ‘welcome’ to join the [D]emocrat[ic] [P]arty,” Heaton posted via social media.

“Why would any civilized person want to support a barbaric platform that champions abortion for any reason through all nine months funded by taxpayers?” the “Carol’s Second Act” star asked.

Heaton noted that she did not vote for President Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election and does not plan to do so this year, either — thus further underscoring the alienating extremism of the modern Democratic Party.

“P.S. I didn’t vote in the last presidential cycle and will not be voting in this one,” she wrote. “I am not a Trump supporter.”

Democratic presidential candidates have started to openly shun pro-life Democrats from their party.

For example, former South Bend, Indiana, mayor and presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg, an open Christian framed by the media as the party’s moderate candidate, told a pro-life Democrat in January that her views on abortion are not welcome in the party.

“So my question was would you be open to language like that in the Democratic platform that really did say that our party is diverse and inclusive and we want everybody?” the pro-life Democrat asked Buttigieg, as highlighted by The Daily Wire.

“Well I support the position of my party, that this kind of medical care needs to be available to everyone, and I support the Roe vs. Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy there are very few restrictions and late in pregnancy there are very few exceptions, and again the best I can offer is that we may disagree on that very important issue and hopefully we will be able to partner on other issues,” the candidate responded.

Moreover, this month, Buttigieg refused to denounce abortion post-birth. The Daily Wire reporter:

“But what if a woman wanted to, I don’t know, invoke infanticide after a baby was born, you’d be comfortable with that?” [asked “The View” co-host Meghan McCain.]

“Does anybody seriously think that’s what these cases were about?” Buttigieg lashed out.

“There are people pushing for that, yes,” McCain noted.

Buttigieg responded by refusing disavow infanticide.

“Think, think about the situation, if this is a late-term situation, then by definition it’s one where a woman was expecting to carry the pregnancy to term, then she gets the most perhaps devastating news of her life,” Buttigieg responded. “We’re talking about families that that may have picked out a name, may be assembling a crib, and they learn something excruciating and are faced with this terrible choice, and I don’t know what to tell them morally about what they should do; I just know that I trust her and her decision medically or morally isn’t gonna be any better because the government is commanding her to do it in a certain way.”

It’s not just “moderate” Buttigieg, of course. Not one Democratic presidential candidate has outlined a single restriction on abortion with which the candidate claims to agree.

via The Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com