Watch: McConnell Rips Schumer's Intimidation Tactics, Democrats' Abortion Radicalism

|
|
Posted: May 10, 2022 1:05 PM
Watch: McConnell Rips Schumer's Intimidation Tactics, Democrats' Abortion Radicalism

Tomorrow, Senate Democrats will attempt to pass an unlimited, nine-month abortion-on-demand bill they're framing as "codifying" Roe v. Wade -- even though it goes much further than that.  This push lacks not only the 60 votes required to advance legislation, but also the 50 votes needed for hypothetical post-cloture passage.  Even some pro-choice Republican Senators object to major elements of the Democrats' extreme bill, but Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has rejected their proposed alternatives, which would pull the effort closer to something that might actually be described as a legislative enshrinement of Roe.  In other words, it'll be yet another messaging vote from the Democratic majority, with no eye toward making real law.  

And the message they're evidently determined to send is, "we passionately stand with the tiny fraction of Americans who demand zero restrictions whatsoever on abortion, for any reason, including up until the moment of birth."  Ghoulish.  These are the same people, mind you, who promiscuously toss around the "extremist" moniker to describe anyone who favors mainstream limitations on the life-ending practice.  On the floor of the upper chamber yesterday, GOP leader Mitch McConnell upbraided Schumer over his ugly intimidation tactics against Supreme Court justices, which were so brazen that they earned a rare public condemnation from the Chief Justice, and laid out the truth on abortion 'extremism' in America today:

Two years ago, the Senate Democratic Leader rallied a crowd on the steps of the Supreme Court and threatened Justices by name if they did not resolve an abortion case the way he wanted. ‘I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.’ This incitement triggered rare public rebukes from the Chief Justice and even the liberal American Bar Association. But apparently the radical left heard their marching orders loud and clear...Since the precedent-smashing leak of a draft opinion last week, the left has set out to harass and intimidate sitting Justices as they consider a pending case. We have seen angry crowds assemble at judges’ private family homes. Activists published a map of their addresses. Law enforcement has had to install a security fence around the Court. Trying to scare federal judges into ruling a certain way is far outside the bounds of normal First Amendment speech or protest. It is an attempt to replace the rule of law with the rule of mobs...Last year, Attorney General Garland’s Justice Department was quick to treat the concerned parents of America like potential domestic terrorists. But curiously, I haven’t heard any announcement about how the DOJ may handle these intimidation tactics aimed at federal judges.

Washington Democrats have gone out of their way to fuel the hysterical, potentially dangerous climate. The President’s statement about the unprecedented leak did not condemn it. His Press Secretary has repeatedly appeared to endorse rallies at judges’ private family residences so long as they don’t turn outright violent. The senior Senator for Massachusetts stood on the Supreme Court steps and shouted, ‘we are gonna fight back.’ Democrats are renewing their calls to break the Senate in order to pack the Court. They want to destroy two institutions for the price of one. One liberal Georgetown Law professor helpfully summarized their mission here. He explained this past weekend that the key moral difference between this pressure campaign and the January 6th riot is that, in this case, ‘the mob is right.’

The Georgetown law professor in question did, in fact, make that argument, which encapsulates the mentality of the hard Left: Our angry mob is right, and our ends justify whatever means are necessary. Their mob is a threat to the republic.  This shallow, childish tribalism is evidently embraced at GU, where a conservative faculty member remains indefinitely suspended over apologized-for tweets in which he objected to President Biden prioritizing race and sex in his recent search for a Supreme Court nominee (an objection shared by a large majority of Americans):


What is going on at Georgetown?  The answer is depressingly simple: The institution caters to the very mob their leftist professor was cheering on — a group comprised the same sorts of people, or even the same literal people, who loudly demanded the incoherent suspension of right-leaning Ilya Shapiro. In short, the mob calls the shots at Georgetown Law.  Back to the McConnell speech:

So what has generated this reckless outrage? What is the Armageddon over which Democrats want to break the Senate, pack the Court, and condone potentially illegal rallies outside judges’ family homes? Here’s the case in question: Whether the state of Mississippi can enact an abortion law that would still be more liberal than the laws in Germany, France, and Switzerland. That is the case that is driving these hysterics. The possibility that abortion laws might begin to move away from China and North Korea and closer to Germany, France, and Switzerland. That’s what’s prompted the calls to destroy our institutions and surround judges’ family homes. That’s why a pro-life nonprofit in Wisconsin got a Molotov cocktail through its window and activists called for disruptions of Sunday worship. Today’s Democratic Party is profoundly out of step with the American people on this issue. Their extreme position ignores modern science and public opinion. Leader Schumer wants the Senate to vote again on a Democrat bill that would effectively legalize abortion on demand through all nine months. 

Their bill is written to protect abortionists rather than mothers. It would roll back health regulations. It would attack Americans’ conscience rights and religious freedoms. It would overturn modest and overwhelmingly popular safeguards like waiting periods, informed consent laws, and possibly even parental notification. And it is written so that in practice, it would allow elective abortion until birth. Democrats’ extreme position is radical on a global scale and it is wildly unpopular with the American people. Only 34% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases into the second trimester. That drops to 19% in the third trimester. But that is what Democrats’ bill would allow in practice. Every Senate Democrat but two, and every House Democrat except a handful, have put their name on this as co-sponsors. That means 97% of Washington Democrats support a position that only 19% of Americans want.

These points cannot be highlighted often enough. The Wall Street Journal editorial board recently reinforced the global comparisons McConnell raised, which put the lie to the cries of 'extremism' from actual extremists:

Abortion in Sweden is available on-demand up to the 18th week, and after that only with medical permission if the fetus isn’t viable. In Italy it’s in the first 90 days. Many countries, such as Denmark, Germany and Belgium, allow abortion on demand up to the 12th week, while France recently extended it to 14 and in Portugal it’s 10. Countries tend to apply stricter limits after those times, such as requiring sign-off from multiple doctors or allowing later abortions only if the mother’s life is in danger. Without court rulings mandating abortion access, European voters by and large have chosen to permit it in a way that would disappoint American pro-lifers. But even liberal and largely secular Europeans impose the sort of limitation on abortion that America’s pro-choice left claims to find intolerable. Mississippi’s ban, which is the law at issue now at the Supreme Court, begins after 15 weeks.

The message is important, but so are messengers.  McConnell's points are sound, and they've also been made by any number of pro-life (and in some cases, moderately pro-choice) women.  As a reminder, a substantial majority of American women favor significant limitations on abortion. Those who would prefer to dismiss what the Kentucky Senator is saying out of hand simply because he's a man are relying on a lazy form of 'argumentation,' if you can call it that, which seeks to disqualify messengers rather than addressing their message on substance.  I took on two such talking points in a Tipsheet post published last week, as well as this radio monologue:

With the hardcore pro-abortion lobby (which, as usual, I distinguish from many pro-choice people) whipped into a frenzy, including doxxing and threats against justices, the Senate has unanimously approved protective measures for members of the Court:


It seems even Chuck Schumer is somewhat unnerved by what he's helped unleash.  I'll leave you with this: