Leatherneck Blogger

WATCH: Abortion Activist Punches 15-Year-Old Girl in the Face Who Was Praying at Planned Parenthood

with one comment

By Micaiah Bilger
December 4, 2017

A Virginia teenage pro-life advocate was punched in the face and knocked to the ground Saturday morning outside a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Roanoke.

The attack is the latest indication of growing hostility toward pro-life advocates across the country.

The victim of the violent attack was Purity Thomas, a 15-year-old student leader of Students for Life of America. SFLA President Kristan Hawkins said police are investigating.

“This act of violence against a group of peaceful pro-life students who were outside a Planned Parenthood facility offering love and support to pregnant women serves as a sad reflection on the state of debate today,” Hawkins said. “It’s horrific that a minor expressing love for pregnant women was targeted for violence. Sadly, this is not an isolated incident.”

Thomas and several other students from Liberty University were doing sidewalk counseling outside the abortion facility on Saturday when the attack occurred, TownHall reports. The students said they were peacefully reaching out to women and praying in a grassy public area near the abortion facility.

Witnesses said a woman confronted the students and began threatening to beat them up and “f— them up.” The group accused the unnamed woman of stealing one of the pro-life advocate’s signs and later punching Thomas, knocking her to the ground.

Someone also took a video of the attack.



Thomas was taken to the hospital. She later told CBN News that a doctor said she sustained a minor concussion from the assault.

The students also called the police, who interviewed the woman who allegedly punched Thomas. It is not clear who the woman was.

“Across the country we are witnessing a rise in the number of incidents of vandalism and violence against peaceful pro-life speech,” Hawkins said in a statement. “We pray that the assailant from today’s attack is brought to justice swiftly. But we also pray for the protection of those who volunteer their time to speak for the innocent, preborn infants and their mothers.”

Pro-life advocates increasingly have become victims of threats, vandalism and other harassment.

Students for Life documented at least 40 incidents of vandalism alone in the past five years against its pro-life students groups. A new interactive map displays the places where its clubs have been victims of vandalism.

This fall, vandals destroyed pro-life student displays at both Northern Kentucky University and St. Louis University. Campus Reform reported two other instances of vandalism just this week: one at the University of Florida and another at Kennesaw State University in Georgia.

A few weeks ago, a professor at San Jose University also allegedly threatened to “ beat the s— out of” pro-life students who were protesting on campus. A university spokeswoman said they are investigating.

“Other incidences of violence against our group include: Administrators destroying chalkings at Kutztown University, vandals throwing paint on a display at Portland State University, and a display of graduation cords (to highlight ‘missing students’ who were killed by abortion) at University of Miami,” according to Students for Life.

Campus Reform reported two other instances of vandalism in one week in mid-November: one at the University of Florida and another at Kennesaw State University in Georgia.

LifeNews also has reported numerous cases of hostility against pro-lifers.

South Carolina Citizens for Life had its sign vandalized earlier this fall. Someone spray painted over the sign and wrote profanities on it, group leader Holly Gatling told LifeNews.

And in late October, pro-life advocates in Dallas, Texas called a bomb squad after they found a suspicious package near their 40 Days for Life site. WFAA News 8 reports the Dallas Police Department later determined that the suspicious package was a hoax, quite possibly meant to scare pro-life advocates who peacefully pray outside a nearby abortion clinic.

Pro-lifers also have become targets of threats and harassment.

In two separate incidents this year, men allegedly threatened to kill pro-life advocates outside abortion facilities in California and Florida. And in early February, violent threats against a California pro-life leaderprompted him to cancel a pro-life rally, LifeNews reported.

In March, a pro-life student display at the University of Colorado at Boulder was vandalized, and another one was vandalized in April at Texas State University. Yet another was vandalized at Fresno State University in California in May, allegedly by a professor.

In June, someone stole a pro-life trailer from Arkansas Right to Life that displayed how many unborn babies die in abortions each year.

Obama: “We had no evidence that Pakistani government was aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad”

with one comment

By Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch
December 2, 2017

Pull my other leg, Barack. He lived down the street from the nation’s foremost military academy. If Pakistani authorities didn’t know he was there, they are incompetent beyond redemption. But why are you still covering for them at this late date?

“Pakistan was not aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad: Obama,” Pakistan Today, December 1, 2017:

NEW DELHI: Former United States president Barack Obama said that there is no evidence that the Pakistan government was aware of the presence of al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

He said this while addressing the 15th Hindustan Times Leadership Summit at Hyatt Regency in New Delhi.

“We had no evidence that Pakistani government was aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad,” he said. “We obviously looked at it.”

US Special Forces killed Osama Bin Laden and four others in a covert US raid, on a compound located near the Pakistan Military Academy Kakul in Abbottabad on May 2, 2011. An aide of Osama purchased the land measuring seven kanals in 2004 and a three-story building was constructed over more than three kanals of the plot in Bilal town.

Ever since the raid took place there was much speculation whether bin Laden had Pakistan state support to keep hiding in the compound. However, documents seized from Bin Laden’s compound did not show sufficient evidence of any probable support from the establishment.

House To Advance Two Gun Bills Including National Reciprocity

with one comment

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 27, 2017

National reciprocity should have had an easy time of it. After all, the stars were as aligned in favor of pro-gun legislation as you were going to find. The entire government leans right politically, which should have made it a slam dunk.

Then Las Vegas happened, and everything got turned upside down.

Now, it appears the House is set to move on two gun bills heading out of committee. One of which is national reciprocity.

The House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to consider two gun measures Wednesday, including one measure that is a top priority of the National Rifle Association.

The committee will vote on a bill that allows gun owners with permits to carry concealed weapons reciprocity to travel to other states with their firearms. It will also take up another measure that updates the federal background check system after problems were exposed following a mass shooting at a Texas church earlier this month.

Congress hasn’t moved stand-alone legislation after the massacre in Las Vegas in October, when a shooter killed at least 58 people and injured hundreds more. Lawmakers from both parties said it was time to regulate bump fire stocks, accessories that the gunman used to allow his firearms to fire similar to automatic weapons. But top Republican leaders suggested new legislation may not be needed on bump stocks because the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives could address the issue administratively. So far the agency hasn’t publicly stated whether it plans to take action on the accessories and bipartisan legislation has been introduced to ban them, but hasn’t advanced yet in the House or Senate.

The new House legislation addressing the background check does call for a study on the devices. The bill directs the Bureau of Justice Statistics to determine how many times a bump stock was used during a crime in the United States and report back to congressional committees in six months.

A study on bump stocks is hardly the worst thing that could happen on that front.

With regard to the background check proposal, this is actually welcome news. While many get annoyed at background checks–and I tend to as well–that’s the program in place now. Having it work correctly means it becomes harder for gun grabbers to make a play for our firearms down the road. After all, it’s the idiots with the guns that are causing the problems, not the guns.

But the big boy is national reciprocity. While I tend to believe constitutional carry should be the law of the land, it’s not. National reciprocity will make it easier for those with concealed carry permits to carry while traveling outside of their home state. As it stands, carriers have to navigate a byzantine labyrinth of reciprocity between states that invariably creates holes because one state doesn’t like the way another state issues their permits.

National reciprocity clears up the whole process for everyone involved.

The fact that it also means states like California that recognize no other permits and won’t issue out-of-state permits can no longer deny individuals from other states their right to keep and bear arms while visiting is just a major bonus.

Pro-Life Congresswoman: Time to Defund the United Nations’ “Pro-Abortion Policies and Campaigns”

with 2 comments

By Susan Yopshihara
December 1, 2017

The head of UN Women lobbied lawmakers in Washington D.C. recently for more funding, even as others work to defund the billion dollar-a-year-agency for its controversial stand on abortion.

The trip was to be a sort of victory lap for Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, UN Women’s executive director, since the U.S. Congress just passed with bipartisan support a law enshrining the UN Security Council’s women, peace, and security agenda, for which UN Women claims proprietorship. Mlambo-Ngcuka appealed to the Congressional Women’s Caucus in Congress to increase funding.

Lawmakers want the agency’s U.S. funding stopped because of its public support for abortion. Congresswoman Ann Wagner (R-MO) told the Friday Fax, “UN Women has no mandate to endorse in any way pro-abortion policies and campaigns like ‘She Decides,’ and when they do, the American taxpayer certainly has no duty to pay for them.”

Europeans launched the “She Decides” campaign as a rebuke to President Donald J. Trump’s reinstatement of the pro-life Mexico City Policy last January. The Mexico City Policy restricts foreign aid to groups performing or promoting abortion overseas.

UN delegates are also wary of the agency’s activism. One African delegate expressed concern to the Friday Fax that UN Women included several references to “sexual and reproductive health” in its recent strategic plan even though the agency has no mandate on health, including sexual and reproductive health and abortion. While it is officially neutral on political matters, UN women staff have lobbied governments during intergovernmental negotiations.

While she was in Washington, Mlambo-Ngcuka took part in panel discussion at the tony offices of Ted Turner’s UN Foundation.  She did not respond directly when her support for “She Decides” was raised, but commented on family planning, “The people with the loudest mouth about what women can do with their bodies tend to be the people that do not have the body parts that women have, it’s the most amazing thing.” The audience of applauded.

The former South African deputy president continued, “I think one of the biggest things that happened to the women’s liberation movement was the birth control pill which gave women the ability to space their children so they could decide when to go to work…We need something as big as decisive as the birth control pill today for women to make their choices. It must not be controlled by government, it must not be controlled by men.”

Critics argue that comparing “She Decides” to family planning is sleight of hand. The Dutch funding initiative requires that any group receiving funds must have been denied them under the Mexico City Policy, that is, for promoting or performing abortions, though this fact is absent from its media campaigns.

UN Women has criticized American pro-life policies in the past. A 2015 position paper took issue with conscience protections for religious organizations under the Affordable Care Act, calling carve outs for the contraception mandate a violation of human rights.

Nations have not agreed to a human right to family planning or abortion, though they have agreed in non-binding documents to a right of couples to freely decide the number and spacing of their children.

Mlambo-Ngcuka highlighted the power of Western initiatives like “She Decides” when she said, “The people with problems are not always the ones who choose the solutions for themselves. It is those who invest and believe in the ideas.”

According to the Senate appropriations bill, the U.S. will not cut nor increase UN Women funding next year. Funding will remain at $8.5 million.

LifeNews.com Note: Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D. writes for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. This article originally appeared in the pro-life group’s Friday Fax publication and is used with permission.


So…An AK Isn’t For Self Defense, Huh?

with one comment

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 29, 2017

While Second Amendment supporters are often pretty good about not needing a reason to want to own a certain gun, those who oppose that right tend to feel a little different. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told an AK-47 style rifle isn’t for hunting or home defense. As someone who has actually hunted with an AK, I’m living proof that part of that is complete bull.

This gentleman from Ohio is proof that the last is bovine excrement.

Dayton Ohio cell phone store owner Adam Seaton used an AK-47 clone to defend himself and his store. It happened about five a.m. on Sunday, 19 November, 2017.

Store video shows the thieves breaking the window at the front of the store, then trying various strategies to get through the security gate. Seaton was alerted on his cell phone by the security system. He was only a block and a half away.

The store has been open since December last year. This was the fourth robbery attempt, the first that has been stopped.

From wdtn.com:

DAYTON — A 22-year-old Dayton business owner fired an AK-47 at burglars breaking into his cell phone store early Sunday morning.

Dayton police were dispatched to Fix or Cell Now at 619 Watervliet Street around 5:09 a.m. after the business owner called to report the attempted robbery.

According to a police report, owner Adam Seaton was blocks away when he received a notification on his phone from the store’s security system.

As he arrived to the store, Seaton told Dayton police he saw two men running from the store. Seaton said one of the men then stopped, pulled out a gun, and pointed it in his direction.

According to police, Seaton then grabbed an AK-47 from his passenger seat and fired at the men. Seaton told our breaking news team he believes one of his bullets hit a suspect, but he cannot be sure.

The thieves fled in a silver truck.  Seaton pursued them. He was on the phone to the dispatcher, who urged him, repeatedly, to pull back and let them go.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how much gun grabbers claim otherwise, so-called assault rifles are an ideal tool for personal defense.

Seaton finally did pull back after the crooks took a shot at him, deciding it was too dangerous to continue his pursuit.  That was probably a smart move, because had he caught up with them, it’s possible that a judge might not have viewed his actions all that favorably.

However, that’s a different subject for another time.

The big takeaway here is that yes, the AK platform is a viable weapon for self-defense. In fact, it makes a lot of sense to use a modern sporting rifle for personal defense because it gives you range, accuracy, and a better round count than the handgun most criminals are using. While it’s not practical for day-to-day carry, if you suspect you’ll need a gun, then a so-called assault rifle is hard to beat.

Democratic Fundraiser Charged With Multiple Gun Felonies

with one comment

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 30, 2017

Democrats, as a general rule, want to limit yours and my access to guns. They may give you all kinds of justification, but the truth is that almost all of them want to limit what kind of guns you can buy to some extent. They would have the average American believe they’re all about responsibility and that guns in private hands are the real problem.

It looks like the issue is really guns in Democrats’ private hands.

Veteran Democratic fundraiser Matthew Lieberman has been charged with multiple felony gun crimes after allegedly firing a handgun and shouting racial slurs at eyewitnesses at two businesses Tuesday.

According to court documents, Lieberman reportedly pointed a handgun at someone at the Amoco gas station on Skinker Boulevard and Highway 40 (Interstate 64) while using racial epithets. He then allegedly fired multiple shots at the building from his car.

In court documents, investigators said surveillance footage showed Lieberman with the gun, and bullet casings at the scene matched the make and model of bullet casings found in Lieberman’s car.

In a separate incident at the Jack in the Box on Hampton Avenue, Lieberman became irate, shouting racial epithets at multiple people performing maintenance work on the restaurant, according to court documents. He discharged a gun multiple times from a Mercedes sedan, the documents say.

Lieberman was arrested on Wednesday and is charged with unlawful use of a weapon and armed criminal action charges, but because he acted like a racist schmuck and started yelling racial slurs, he gets what they’re terming a “hate crime enhancement.”

Isn’t it amusing to see Democrats hoisted by their proverbial petards?

Of course, this may explain why so many leftists think ordinary Americans can’t be trusted with firearms. They know that many of their friends can’t be trusted with firearms, and since they’re so much “better” than ordinary Americans because they hold all the right opinions, how can the average Joe possibly be trusted?

The thing is, 99.99999 percent of all Americans look at the antics Lieberman allegedly pulled and shake their head in disgust. We all know that unless he was legitimately in fear of his life, there was no reason to pull that gun. Further, we know that being approached by a minority doesn’t constitute being in fear of losing your life by any stretch of the imagination.

While we only have part of the picture at this time, we’ll have to see what exactly was going on here, but it seems that Lieberman–assuming he actually did these things, of course–may have some mental health issues. Either that or he’s the racist that the left has been looking for.

It’ll be interesting to see who all he raised money for. More importantly, it’ll be interesting to see if the Democrats he raised funds for will do anything about that money. After all, if anyone on the right were in that boat the media would be all over them to either donate the money or return it or something.

But the left usually gets to play by a different set of rules.

It just seems that their set of rules doesn’t keep them from being arrested for a firearm related felony with a hate crime enhancement. Who knew?

Are Gun Control Advocates Liars, Or Just Stupid?

with one comment

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 30, 2017

Are gun control advocates liars, people who willfully tell falsehoods, or are they just complete and total idiots? It’s a fair question and it could go either way. I’ll also concede that the word “or” in that first sentence may need to be “and” as well. It’s certainly possible that they’re both.

The latest example that makes me ask the question comes from the New York Times. In particular, columnist Gail Collins, who writes this bit:

The House Judiciary Committee just voted to make it impossible for a state to always keep people convicted of violent offenses from carrying concealed weapons.

With a beginning like that, you just know it’s going to be good. You know that you’re going to read a reasonable discourse on the topic of national reciprocity, right?

Let’s continue.

That was just a detail in a very long day and really dreadful debate about the right to bear arms. In a normal world it might be the talk of the dinner table, but really, this week hardly anyone noticed.

On the one hand you had Garrison Keillor and Matt Lauer getting canned for sexual harassment. On the other there’s the president of the United States circulating a picture of a Muslim beating up a statue of the Blessed Virgin. About which, the presidential spokeswoman said, “Whether it’s a real video, the threat is real.”

And I haven’t even gotten to the tax bill. Or North Korea. Good grief.

But still, guns. Attention must be paid. If you count every gun crime that involves four or more victims as a mass shooting, we’ve had 397 so far this year, including the ungodly tragedies in Las Vegas and the small Texas church. You’d think the National Rifle Association would go away and be quiet for a month or two. But no, its minions in the House of Representatives were busy on Wednesday getting committee approval for a bill that would make it impossible for states to impose their rules about carrying concealed weapons on people who are visiting from someplace else.

Instead, we’re supposed to respect the judgment of the state whence they came. People, do you have this kind of confidence? We are having this conversation two weeks after Wisconsin eliminated the age limit for hunting licenses. So far there are 1,800 happy Wisconsinites under the age of 10 with the right to put their little fingers on the trigger, several less than a year old.

First, Gail, there’s a huge difference between a concealed carry permit and a hunting license. National reciprocity has nothing to do with hunting, and Wisconsin’s decision to eliminate the age for a hunting permit doesn’t mean that small children will be running around the woods unsupervised. In fact, it’s kind of impossible for most kids to go hunting on their own anyway, what with needing a ride to the hunting land in the first place.

But let’s not let facts get in the way of an argument.

Kind of like that opening line. You see, Gail’s worried about “people convicted of violent offenses” walking around with concealed guns and police being unable to do anything about it. However, what she misses is that people with concealed carry permits? You know what they’re not? People convicted of violent offenses.

That’s right. You can’t get a permit if you have been convicted of a violent offense, and the background check process is more detailed for concealed carry permits in every single state than even the background check to buy a gun. It’s why the Sutherland Springs killer could buy a gun at a gun store, but not get a carry permit. It’s because the system works.

Further, people with concealed carry permits are the least likely individuals to commit a crime.

And this information is out there, so I’m left wondering if Gail Collins and people like her are just dumb, or if they’re willfully lying in the pages of the nation’s largest newspaper in order to sway people to their way of thinking. I mean, it’s possible they’re repeating someone else’s lies, of course, but that just puts them in the dumb camp. Do a little research for yourself, for crying out loud. Get both sides of the story. At least try and find out what the other side is saying.

At least then you’d know that no one wants violent criminals walking the streets with concealed firearms and that this bill won’t allow them to.

But that might blow the narrative away. Can’t have that.

Austin Hero Pulls Gun On Rapist

with one comment

By Tom Knighton
Bearing Arms
November 15, 2017

A lot of people don’t take their guns with them when they’re doing certain things, particularly on a run. After all, even a lightweight pistol is going to cause issues with your everyday running shorts, and no one wants to wear a fanny pack, especially one loaded down with a firearm, right?

Well, Josh Williams of Austin, Texas didn’t worry about any of that. Eventually, anyway, and at least one area resident is thankful for that.

Josh Williams has been licensed to carry a gun for about 10 years and takes his Glock 43 almost everywhere he goes, KVUE-TV reported.

But on the morning of Sept. 15, Williams almost didn’t take the gun along for his weekly run on the Hike-and-Bike Trail in Austin, Texas — but a voice inside him said he might need it, the station said.

Did he ever.

It was about 5:30 a.m. and still dark when Williams heard a woman’s screams on the trail over his earbuds, KVUE reported.

So he took out his earbuds and pointed his flashlight in the direction of the screaming — and quickly realized a woman was being sexually assaulted, the station said.

“I came up, pulled my gun and told him to get off of her,” Williams told KVUE, adding that he ordered the man to get on his knees and show his hands.

The man ran off, leaving him with the victim, safe and sound.

A few days later, 22-year-old Richard McEachern was arrested for the assault. He remains in the Travis County Jail.

Williams said that he’d never thought he would point the gun at another person, but that’s how it goes. Most of us never really do, but then something happens and a number of gun owners actually do. What matters is what you do when confronted with a situation that requires it, and Williams did what most of us would have done.

He protected another.

“It’s dark, and I don’t know what’s out there, so I have it to protect myself and other people,” Williams told KVUE. “That’s what it’s all about anyway — to help other people with it, not just myself.”

For a lot of gun owners, it’s exactly that.

Most gun owners don’t want to just protect themselves, but others as well. However, contrary to what the anti-gun crowd likes to think, we’re not a bunch of wannabe heroes itching for the opportunity to pull their guns and feel like a badass. We’re just people who don’t like to see others getting hurt.

Yet some would have seen Williams and others like him left unarmed and unable to help others. They would rather see an innocent woman raped and possibly murdered than to see someone like Williams be able to step up and protect another.

They’d rather see women raped and possibly murdered than to allow women to have the most effective means to defend themselves out there. They operate under the warped belief that a violated and potentially dead victim is preferable to a live woman and a dead scumbag.

Egyptian lawyer: It’s a man’s ‘national duty’ to rape women who wear ripped jeans

with one comment

By Rick Moran
American Thinker
November 2, 2017

Oh, those crazy Muslim men!  What will they say next?

An Egyptian lawyer, appearing on a popular satellite news program, told a panel debating a new law on prostitution in Egypt that it is the “patriotic duty” of men to sexually harass and a “national duty” to rape women who wear revealing clothing.

New York Post:

An Egyptian lawyer has sparked outrage after saying women who wear ripped jeans deserve to be sexually harassed and raped.

Nabih al-Wahsh, a prominent conservative in Egypt, said raping women who wear ripped jeans is a man’s “national duty”, adding that girls who show parts of their body by wearing such clothes are inviting men to harass them.

His disgusting comments were made during a TV talk show called “Infrad” on satellite channel Al-Assema.

The panel were debating a draft law on prostitution and “inciting debauchery” when Wahsh made the jaw-dropping comments.

During the heated debate, Wahsh said: “Are you happy when you see a girl walking down the street with half of her behind showing?”

He added: “I say that when a girl walks about like that, it is a patriotic duty to sexually harass her and a national duty to rape her.”

His controversial remarks prompted fury across the country and Egypt’s National Council for Women announced it plans to file a complaint to the attorney general against Wahsh and the TV channel.

The council said it had also filed a complaint to the Supreme Council for Media Regulation and urged media outlets not to invite controversial figures who make remarks that incite violence against women.

The lawyer has apparently been paying attention to U.S. TV and how politicians shamelessly deny they said what they clearly said:

Wahsh later said his comments were a call to demand stricter punishment for sexual harassment.

He added: “Girls must respect themselves so others respect them. Protecting morals is more important than protecting borders.”

So urging men to sexually harass and rape women is actually a way to “demand stricter punishment for sexual harassment”?  Sheesh.

While the various women’s groups and Westernized media heavily criticized the lawyer, what do you think the reaction to his words were in the suks and mosques across the rest of Egypt?

Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt received a majority of votes in the last relatively free election.  So I think it safe to say the lawyer’s sentiments would meet with the approval of a solid majority of Egyptian men, who view women little better than cattle and, in some ways, worse.

Egypt’s president, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, has made it clear he wants to secularize the country.  But after centuries of control by radical clergy, he faces an uphill battle to bring Egypt into the 21st century.

Pro-Abortion Democrat Congressman Shouts Down Black Pro-Life Woman, Calls Her “Ignorant”

with one comment

By Steven Ertelt
November 1, 2017

A pro-abortion Democrat Congressman, during a congressional hearing today, shouted down a black pro-life advocate who expressed her dismay at how Planned Parenthood targets black babies in abortions. Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat, yelled at the pro-life woman and said she was “ignorant.”

Star Parker told members of Congress during the hearing on a bill to ban abortions after 6 weeks that she believes abortion unfairly targets the African American community.

“In fact when you put the Dred Scott decision next to the Roe v Wade decision, they read almost verbatim. I’d like to also address something that was brought up earlier…when it comes to mixing the abortion issue with the challenges that we face in many of our hard-hit communities. I feel it disingenuous that the issues of Medicaid would come up, and other opportunities for us to re-address what has happened in our most distressed zip codes,” Parker said.

“The way that Planned Parenthood targets these particular zip codes with abortion. Abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community today. Since Roe v. Wade was legalized, 20 million humans have been killed inside of the womb of black women. And then on Halloween, Planned Parenthood tweets out that the black women are safest if they abort their child rather than bring it to term,” Parker continued.

Cohen complained that he is “not disingenuous about anything I say…. And to suggest I’m disingenuous shows your ignorance or your absolute inability to deal with Congresspeople the way they should. I believe in those issues and I think they’re proper, and to say I’m disingenuous is just wrong and I expect an apology.”

Instead of an apology, pro-life lawmakers on the panel said Congressman Cohen ought to apologize to Parker for calling her “ignorant.”

“I would ask for an apology from the gentleman from Tennessee — calling our witness ignorant when it seems to me she has a whole lot more knowledge and wisdom” than he does, Rep. Louie Gohmert commented.

“She’s ignorant about me,” Cohen replied.

Citing the “lack of civility” that had erupted, Chairman Steve King ended the hearing.


%d bloggers like this: