By all scientific and legal standards, former vice president Joe Biden has seven grandchildren. For whatever reason, the Democratic candidate has consistently gotten that number wrong on the campaign trail, and did so again on Tuesday.
"How many of you have been unable to hug your grandkids in the last seven months?" Biden said during a campaign event in Florida. "I got six of ’em."
FACT CHECK: Biden does not have six of ’em. He has seven of ’em.
Biden’s deceased son Beau had two children: Natalie and Robert. Biden’s troubled son, Hunter, has five children: Naomi, Finnegan, and Maisy with his first wife; a son Beau with current wife Melissa Cohen; and a son identified in Arkansas court documents as "NJR."
According to the results of a DNA test, which were announced last year on Joe Biden’s 77th birthday, it is a "scientific certainty" that Hunter was the father of "NJR." Those results ultimately helped settle a legal dispute between Hunter and the child’s mother, Lunden Alexis Roberts, who previously worked as a stripper under the stage name "Dallas."
Insufferable ABC News chief Washington correspondent Jonathan Karl actually took the time to fact-check a claim by Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden that “[n]obody making under $400,000 bucks would have their taxes raised” under his proposed tax plan.
Talk about a twilight-zone moment.
During the October 11, edition of ABC This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Karl grilled Biden campaign co-chair Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) on Biden’s promises to only raise taxes on the rich. Karl questioned: “[Biden] has said that he will not raise taxes on anybody making less than $400,000 a year. But the analysis put forward by the Tax Policy Center [TPC] shows that, in fact, middle-income earners between — making between $50,000-$90,000 a year — will see an increase of $260. Is he wrong about this?” Karl continued: “It looks like there will be at least some increase for middle-income earners under his tax plan.”
Richmond strangely stated that the TPC had “a different interpretation.” He then doubled down on Biden’s false claim that taxes on the middle class will not be raised: “The plan has been evaluated by several economic policy groups, and most of them say that no middle-class taxpayer will see a tax increase.” Richmond then tried to negate Karl’s fact-check by saying that “I think the fact-checkers will confirm that our plan in fact would not raise taxes on the middle class.”
Karl wasn’t having it, and continued to press Richmond on the fact that the Biden campaign had pledged to repeal President Donald Trump’s tax cuts on “day one.” Karl said: “Now, obviously the Trump tax cuts lowered — significantly lowered — the tax rate for lower income earners.” He continued: “In fact, the Tax Policy Center found that middle-income workers, some middle-income workers saw $900 a year in tax savings. So, repealing the Trump tax cuts — full-on repeal — that does raise taxes on middle-income earners, doesn’t it?”
Richmond blurted out shockingly: “No, look, I agree.” But, he hedged himself quickly by saying that “I agree that, that policy center would take that opinion.” He then repeated himself by reiterating the Biden talking points: “But what we have seen, and our goal is to not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000.”
But the TPC is not the only think tank to come to similar conclusions about Biden’s proposals.
On a dynamic basis, The Tax Foundation’s General Equilibrium Model estimated that Biden’s tax plan “would reduce after-tax incomes by about 2.5 percent across all income groups over the long run.” Biden’s plan would also lead to a 1.47 percent contraction in GDP and a loss of at least 518,000 full-time jobs. [Emphasis added.]
Conservatives are under attack. Contact ABC News at 818-460-7477 and demand they continue to fact-check the Biden campaign’s false claims on taxes.
For Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, a blank notepad said it all. In Day 2 of her hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Barrett was pounded by questions from Democratic senators on abortion, gun control, racism, the weight of court precedent and other issues she handled off the top of her head. It was…
CBS News Catherine Herridge has obtained a 94-page spread sheet (pdf here) showing dates of media reports, dates of Steele reports on the same material, and the FBI effort to verify or validate the circular process. In essence this is evidence of the process we initially shared almost three years ago; only now we know the names.
Former SSCI staffer Dan Jones, former Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson, and Simpson’s crew at Fusion-GPS, pitched and planted phony Trump-Russia evidence with the media and simultaneously gave those fake points to Chris Steele to supplement the dossier. Using the same method of Ezra Klein’s “JournOList” replication, Dan Jones and Fusion-GPS paid the journalists to run the stories.
…”media reports on FBI reports of media reports”…
Steele then used the same information from Jones and Fusion in his Dossier and cited the planted media reports; as evidence to substantiate. The Dossier is then provided to the FBI. The journalists then provide *indulgences* to the FBI as part of the collaboration.
The FBI, specifically Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and public information office Mike Kortan, then leak the outcomes of the FBI Dossier investigative processes to the same media that have reported on the originating material. It is all a big circle of planting and laundering the same originating false material; aka a “wrap up smear.”
Michael Isikoff highlighted the level of how enmeshed media is with the Fusion team in February 2018 when he admitted his reporting was being used by the DOJ and FBI to advance the political objectives of the intelligence community.
Additionally, FBI investigator Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page were shown in their text messages to be leaking stories from the Clinton Investigation, the Trump investigation and the Mueller investigation to journalists at Politico, The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post. –SEE HERE–
FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was busted by the Inspector General leaking stories to the media and then lying about it to INSD and IG investigators. FBI Director James Comey admitted to leaking stories to the New York Times, and even hired his friend Andrew Richman (off-the-books), gave him access to FBI and NSA databases, and then leaked information to Richman along with another friend Benjamin Wittes at Lawfare blog.
Lest we forget, the IG report on how the FBI handled the Clinton investigation revealed that dozens of FBI officials were actually taking bribes from the media for information:
IG REPORT – We identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters. Attached to this report as Attachments E and F are two link charts that reflect the volume of communications that we identified between FBI employees and media representatives in April/May and October 2016. We have profound concerns about the volume and extent of unauthorized media contacts by FBI personnel that we have uncovered during our review.
[…] We do not believe the problem is with the FBI’s policy, which we found to be clear and unambiguous. Rather, we concluded that these leaks highlight the need to change what appears to be a cultural attitude among many in the organization. (link to pdf – page Xii of executive summary)
Madness.
This is an IG fact-based criticism of the institution of the FBI, not simply a few rogue officials within it.
But wait…. Perspective:
Later it was revealed that Andrew Weissman, Robert Mueller’s #1 special counsel prosecutor, was coordinating investigative efforts with the full support of four AP reporters who were giving Weissman tips. That’s information from journalists to use in his court filings and submitted search warrants. Make sure you grasp this: The AP journalists were feeding information to their ideological allies within the special counsel.
Nuts; simply, well, nuts.
And then there’s Devlin Barrett, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:
Additionally, Christopher Steele has stated in U.K. court records the person in charge of the Clinton Campaign’s opposition research firm, Glenn Simpson from Fusion GPS, arranged and coordinated for Mr. Steele to talk to several journalists (CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Yahoo News and Mother Jones) while Mr. Steele was also the primary source of information for the FBI investigators (including Strzok and Page):
Make sure you read that full response from Christopher Steele above to see the scope of the media engagements he was conducting.
As more evidence surfaces the relationship between journalists, Fusion-GPS, Chris Steele and the media’s DOJ/FBI sources begins blending together. The FBI was using media reports, which were based on Fusion-GPS pitches, to bolster its investigative documents to the FISA court. It is an intelligence laundry operation:
According to the U.K records, Christopher Steele reports this September 2016 meeting with Isikoff was arranged by Glenn Simpson. According to Michael Isikoff on his February podcast, he met Christopher Steele at a Washington, D.C. hotel in Sept. 2016. They were joined by his “old friend” Glenn Simpson, the founder of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, who Isikoff now defines as a “private investigator.”
So Christopher Steele was meeting with journalists, the journalists were writing articles; the FBI was leaking to media and simultaneously citing those same articles as underlying evidence to support their counterintelligence investigations; and all of this was used to validate the investigative documents the FBI was receiving from Christopher Steele; who, along with the leaking FBI officials, was also the source of the media articles.
FUBAR! This is exponentially bonkers.
This is a circle of information, all coming from Dan Jones and Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS, who was the opposition research firm being financed by Hillary Clinton, along with FBI officials who were using their own strategic leaks to validate their own investigation.
Think about the scale of the reporting, and reporting on reporting, of anonymous leaks, false leaks, lies from “people with knowledge of the matter”, “government officials involved in the matter”, “people familiar with the matter”, “government sources” etc. all going in one unified and semi-coordinated direction – against the aggregate Trump administration.
Now, it actually gets even more convoluted.
Christopher Steele has sworn under oath that he met with multiple journalists (at least eight organizations) in September, mid-October, and late-October 2016: “at Fusion’s instruction“. (pdf page #7)
Overlay upon that sworn admission with what Glenn Simpson (Fusion-GPS) told the House Intelligence Committee while also under oath about his involvement in sharing information derived from Christopher Steele:
FBI Director James Comey admits to leaking his ‘memos’ to the New York Times. FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was busted for leaking and lying about it. FBI #2 Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page are caught in their text messages leaking to Politico, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.
…. AND the FBI is caught, in at least one FISA application, using Yahoo media reports provided by them AND their investigative source Christopher Steele to establish a basis for FISA “Title I” surveillance; the most intrusive and wide-open search and surveillance authority possible.
The Clinton Campaign is paying Fusion-GPS to conduct opposition research against Donald Trump. In addition to the collaboration between Dan Jones, Glenn Simpson pushed that opposition research into the media, and Fusion GPS is also providing that opposition research –including information from contacts with media– directly to the FBI:
… In addition to using the Fusion-GPS opposition research to underpin their counterintelligence investigation, the FBI then turn around and leak the same opposition research information to the media to create secondary support for their counterintelligence investigation.
Tell me again how the media can possibly write about this now?
The problem is not just corruption with the U.S. Justice System, the DOJ and the FBI; the problem is corruption within the media.
We’re talking about thousands of hours of media TV pundits, thousands more columns written, and almost every scintilla of it based on originating intelligence sources -from the larger intelligence system- that are now being exposed as duplicitous and conspiratorial in the scale of their malicious intent.
This larger story-line has traveled in one direction. The narrative has only traveled in one direction. Each thread converging on codependent trails for collective stories all going in one direction. One big engineered narrative endlessly pushed. Think about how far the collective media have traveled with this story over the past eighteen months?
Hell, twenty-something-year-old “journalists” were so committed to the resistance narrative they were even sleeping with their sources to get any little engineering angle possible.
Now, over a period of several years, it has become increasingly obvious the collective journey, using all that expended effort, was intentionally going in the wrong direction.
The media have fully invested themselves in four months of narrative distribution in only one direction. Not a single MSM entity has questioned their travel as a result of false leaks or false sources in the totality of time they have covered the DOJ and FBI story. They have even won Pulitzer prizes for writing stories about the lies and manufactured evidence.
Nothing within their collective need to will-an-outcome will change the media’s proximity to facts as the truthful story behind the DOJ and FBI corruption is finally exposed. The media are so far away from the place where this story ends, they have no inherent capability to even begin to travel in the opposite direction, toward the truth.
The only way they could align with the truth is to admit that virtually every scintilla of their reportage over the past four years was inherently false or manipulated by the “sources” distributing the material for their willfully blind reporting.
There’s not a single media outlet capable of doing that.
Think about a New York Times, CNN, New Yorker, Wall Street Journal, Mother Jones, Yahoo News or Washington Post journalist having to write an article deconstructing a foundation of four-years worth of lies they participated in creating.
Do we really think such a catastrophic level of corrupted journalism could reconstitute into genuine reporting of fact-based information?
CLAIM: President Donald Trump called seniors “virtually nobody,” and called troops “losers” and “suckers.”
VERDICT: FALSE: Trump was talking about coronavirus and young people, and claims about his comments on troops have been debunked.
Former Vice President Joe Biden told an audience of seniors in Florida on Tuesday that President Trump considered seniors to be “virtually nobody.” He specifically cited a speech by Trump last month, saying that Trump said the coronavirus “affects virtually nobody,” and hurt “just elderly people with heart and other problems.”
He went on to say that Trump was talking specifically about seniors.
On November 3rd, Ohio will decide whether we end the pandemic and return to record prosperity, or whether we allow “Sleepy Joe Biden” and his group of incompetents to delay the vaccine, shut down the country. He actually suggested that he would shut down the country. [Boos] We now know the disease. We didn’t know it. Now we know it affects elderly people, elderly people with heart problems and other problems. If they have other problems, that’s what it really affects. That’s it. You know, in some states, thousands of people, nobody young below the age of 18 — like, nobody. They have a strong immune system. Who knows? Take your hat off to the young because they have a hell of an immune system, but it affects virtually nobody. It’s an amazing thing.
Trump was specifically talking about whom it affects among young people under 18 — and the answer was “virtually nobody.”
At no time did he suggest that seniors were “virtually nobody,” and Trump specifically singled out the risks to seniors.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany also noted in a Sep. 22 press briefing that the president has been talking about young people. (Indeed, even the journalist who asked her about the quote presumed the president was talking about the young.)
Biden himself has acknowledged that coronavirus is less of a risk to children. In a speech about the coronavirus vaccine that issuing developed under the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed, Biden said: “Children are less likely to die, although they can. And it’s more likely that their teachers and the elderly grandparents, et cetera, would be exposed. So the first [vaccine doses] would go to the people most susceptible.”
Biden also repeated the debunked claims by the Atlantic that Trump had called American soldiers buried in a World War I cemetery “suckers and losers.” The website cited four anonymous sources.
Those claims have never been corroborated — and have been disputed by more than a dozen current and former administration officials who were with Trump at the time. Biden went even further than the Atlantic article, claiming that Trump was talking about troops in general, not in a specific cemetery.
Breitbart News has fact-checked Biden’s false claim numerous times, and Trump disputed it to Biden’s face at the first debate.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett held up a blank notepad when Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) asked her to show the public the notes she’s been using to answer the numerous questions spat at her during day two of the confirmation hearings.
“Most of us have multiple notebooks and notes and books, things like that in front of us,” said Sen. Cornyn (video below). “Can you hold up what you’ve been referring to in answering our questions?”
Barrett held up a blank notepad.
“Is there anything on it?” asked Cornyn.
“The letterhead that says United States Senate,” the judge replied.
Early during Tuesday’s hearing, Barrett was asked about her views on Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion case that would push the legalization of abortion back to the states if overturned.
Barrett argued that expressing a view on a precedent would signal to litigants “that I might tilt one way or another in a pending case,” as noted by The Daily Wire.
“Do you agree with Justice Scalia’s view that Roe [v. Wade] was wrongly decided?” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) pressed.
“Senator, I do wanna be forthright and answer every question so far as I can. I think on that question, I’m gonna invoke Justice Elena Kagan’s description, which I think is perfectly put. When she was in her confirmation hearing, she said that she was not gonna grade precedent, give a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down. … It would be wrong and a violation of the canons for me to do that as a sitting judge.”
“If I express a view on a precedent one way or another, whether I say I love it or I hate it, it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a pending case,” reasoned Barrett.
A frustrated Feinstein pushed again, framing the question as of most importance for “half the population,” noting that it was “distressing not to get a straight answer.” However, she received the same answer from Barrett.
Asked a third time, Barrett responded, “My answer is the same … It’s a contentious issue … but I can’t express views on cases, or pre-commit to approaching a case any particular way.”
The judge was also asked during the hearing about how she felt about being referred to as a “female Scalia.”
“I would say that Justice Scalia was a mentor. As I said when I accepted the president’s nomination that his philosophy is mine, too,” she responded, according to ABC News. “He was a very eloquent defender of originalism and it was also true of textualism, which is the way that I approach statutes and their interpretation and similarly to what I just said about originalism.”
“If I’m confirmed, you would not be getting Justice Scalia, you would be getting Justice Barrett,” emphasized the judge.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming amember.
A black military veteran who owns a cafe in Portland, Oregon, told Fox News his vote for President Donald Trump is now "solidified" since Antifa rioters shot at his restaurant Sunday night during a "Day of Rage."
What happened?
John Jackson — who served in the Army and Marines and owns Heroes American Cafe — told the cable network his restaurant was deemed "unfriendly" to the Black Lives Matter movement and was subsequently targeted.
With that, two windows in his cafe’s downtown location were shot at and another window was struck with a blunt object — possibly a baseball bat, Jackson told Fox News.
Image source: YouTube screenshot
A Thursday tweet from @DublinPDX claimed Jackson’s cafe gives its profits "to their heroes… cops" and ripped businesses that support law enforcement, the cable network added.
"We’re trying to compile a list of all non-friendly businesses in PDX," a screenshot of another tweet read. "AKA any company that’s hanging blue lives garbage in their store or anything else that’s anti the BLM movement. Drop them below."
Antifa rioters shot inside the Heroes American Cafe in downtown Portland last night during their mass rampage. Anti… https://t.co/JV27VdXT0R
Jackson told KPTV-TV he received a threatening phone call last week saying he and his restaurant would be targeted.
He added to the station that prior to the attack he was sitting in front of one of soon-to-be-fired-at widows: "That’s where I sit and do work; I would’ve literally been shot."
But Fox News said Heroes was open Monday despite damage to the building — and that Jackson isn’t backing down.
"We’re not changing what we do because of things that are, to me, kind of terroristic in approach," he added to KPTV. "We’re just not yielding to any of that."
Jackson also noted to Fox News that his businesses support all heroes, which include police officers, military personnel, veterans, nurses, and firefighters.
Image source: YouTube screenshot
"We’re for all heroes, and we don’t support zeroes," he added to the cable network. "So if you’re a bad cop, we don’t really have time for you. If you’re walking your beat, and you’re taking care of your people, or you’re saving lives, we love you."
How does the incident affect his vote?
Jackson told Fox News he voted for Trump in 2016 with some reservations — but given the attack on his restaurant, all doubts have been dismissed.
"This solidified my Trump vote," he added to cable network. "I’m done with this weakness, and we need some real strong leadership."
Statues toppled, businesses damaged during destructive night of rioting in downtown Portlandyoutu.be
Why are Minneapolis residents terrified to leave their homes in recent months? For the same reason why someone brazenly shot and killed an anti-Antifa counterprotester in broad daylight in Denver on Saturday. There is no deterrent against violent criminals any more and therefore no protection for the average citizen.
"We have never seen anything like this."
"I’m scared to even drive after dark."
"I don’t feel safe walking around my neighborhood."
"Everybody feels the same way. We all want to move."
This is just some of the feedback that members of the Minneapolis city council received during a meeting of the Public Health and Safety Committee last Thursday, according to Alpha news. During a two-hour virtual hearing, numerous citizens spoke about their concern of understaffed and demoralized police and the role of the city’s politicians in emboldening criminals. With almost a quarter of the year left to go, there is already a 37.5% increase in homicides over the 12-month total of 2019.
The message has essentially been telegraphed that law and order is a racist concept, and so long as anyone acts violently in the name of "racial justice," it is forgiven or even encouraged. The black communities closest to the violence are paying for this a lot more than the gated communities of politicians.
Bill Rodriguez, a passionate citizen speaker at the meeting, summed up the consequences perfectly. "If we don’t act soon, here’s what’s going to happen: you’ll be presiding over the biggest exodus of businesses and families that this town has ever seen just as some of you are running for reelection next year."
But in city after city, we are seeing the opposite of law and order. The city officials are taking actions to discourage the police and encourage violent criminals, particularly those involved with BLM and ANTIFA. According to the Oregonian, out of 974 criminal cases stemming from the Portland riots over the past several months, 666 were dropped by Multnomah District Attorney Mike Schmidt. Moreover, only 7 out of the 39 arrests for assaulting police officers resulted in charges being filed. The outlet even found 18 individuals who were arrested three or more times throughout the rioting since May. Nearly all the charges have been dropped.
The Oregonian further found that even some of the cases that were initially listed as having criminal charges lodged against the defended were later dropped. "But court records show prosecutors have subsequently decided to drop all charges in at least 22 of these cases, some that have included allegations of riot, burglary and unlawful use of a weapon."
Is it any wonder why a suspect is seen on video in broad daylight shooting an anti-ANTIFA protester in Denver on Saturday? There is simply no deterrent against these people because they have a de facto green light from city politicians, prosecutors, and courts to rampage with impunity.
In Rochester, New York, a left-wing protester was caught on camera punching a policeman in the face. He was released the next day.
The guy with the red head covering punched a Rochester police officer in the face, and was released without charges… https://t.co/D8fiiv0ngk
According to the New York Post, a similar incident just happened in Manhattan. Angel Rivera, 18, who allegedly head-butted an NYPD cop following three prior arrests for assaulting officers, was let back onto the streets on Saturday.
How much longer are we going to allow this one-sided war on citizens and cops alike to play out while the only people who are deterred are those who act in self-defense?
Jake Gardner is driven to suicide. A Patriot Prayer member is murdered in Portland. Now this murder in Denver. Ther… https://t.co/m2iBIgUB3N
— Colonizer Respecter Pedro ? Gonzalez (@Colonizer Respecter Pedro ? Gonzalez)1602375778.0
This dynamic is creating a death spiral of demoralizing police, vacancies in key policing positions, sparse police presence, weakening of deterrent, and emboldening of criminals. Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that many city police departments are having trouble finding police chiefs. People simply don’t want the job. As a result, the death toll of violence due to BLM and ANTIFA will continue to mount.
BLM killed 30+ people this year.David DornAaron DanielsonSecoriea TurnerJessica WhitakerJavar HarrellChris Be… https://t.co/VxusEYlFaW
Meanwhile, as violent criminals are released in cities like New York, often without posting any bail, New York officials are fining Jewish synagogues for opening their doors and exercising their First Amendment rights. So, while peaceful people in America’s major cities must quiver in fear of violent criminals, not only can they not count on their government to protect them, but they must fear its tyrannical hand as well. The very people who respect the police the most must now fear them, while those who assault the police go undeterred. Who ever said crime doesn’t pay and that violence is not the answer?
New York Times climate and energy reporter Hiroko Tabuchi linked the oil and gas industry (which she covers) to white supremacy in a since-deleted tweet which read:
I’ve been thinking a lot about fossil fuels and white supremacy recently. Almost every single oil executive, lobbyist, spokesperson I’ve dealt with is white and male. It’s difficult not to see a link.
That slur on an entire industry came on October 1, inspired by Tabuchi’s reading of an article, “Proud Boys and petro-masculinity,” from an activist climate web site. Other potentially offensive tweets have also disappeared from her account, but one, still standing as of now, appears to reference her deleted “white supremacy” comment.
In her opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday over the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) evoked the late-Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, fearing that her legacy could be erased.
“By replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg with someone who will undo her legacy, President Trump is attempting to roll back America’s rights for decades to come,” said Harris as a children’s book bearing Ginsburg’s image loomed behind her. “Every American must understand that with this nomination, equal justice under law is at stake. Our voting rights are at stake. Workers’ rights are at stake. Consumer rights are at stake. The right to a safe and legal abortion is at stake. Holding corporations accountable is at stake. And there is so much more.”
Harris dismissed Barrett’s nomination as little more than a cheap power grab by the Trump administration to potentially kill the Affordable Care Act and asked the chairman to delay her nomination until after the election.
“So, Mr. Chairman, I do believe this hearing is a clear attempt to jam through a supreme court nominee who will take healthcare away from millions of people during a deadly pandemic that has already killed more than 214,000 Americans,” concluded Harris. “I believe that we must listen to our constituents and protect their access to healthcare, and wait to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after Americans decide what they want in the White House.”
Democrats have largely avoided criticizing Amy Coney Barrett’s faith, opting to leave that task to the media instead. As Harris demonstrated, the opening arguments on Monday’s hearing focused on Barrett’s apparent opposition to the Affordable Care Act. As Andrew McCarthy pointed out at National Review, however, Barrett has never once publicly criticized Obamacare as a work of policy.
“As a judge, Barrett has not ruled on Obamacare. As a scholar, she has taken the firm position that a judge’s important but modest role is to say what the law is, not to formulate public policy,” wrote McCarthy. “The best prediction of her position on legislation, therefore, is that its policy direction is for Congress to decide; the judge’s narrow role is to ensure that enacted law complies with constitutional requirements, regardless of its political or ideological bent.”
Despite Amy Coney Barrett having never said which way she would rule if Obamacare were once again taken up by the Supreme Court, Democrats have stressed that the former president’s signature work of healthcare reform now stands at risk.
“The president has promised to appoint justices who will vote to dismantle that law. As a candidate, he criticized the Supreme Court for upholding the law and said, ‘if I win the presidency, my judicial appointments will do the right thing, unlike Bush’s appointee John Roberts on ObamaCare,’” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said in her opening statement Monday morning.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming amember.
Image source: YouTube screenshot
Image source: YouTube screenshot
