Nancy was probably ecstatic when the baby killing advocates targeted Supreme Court justices. Not so much now
Pro-abortion activists that have been protesting at churches and the homes of Supreme Court justices over the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade have a new target on the agenda: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The left-wing group Ruth Sent Us announced Tuesday that protesters from multiple pro-abortion groups are descending on Pelosi’s San Francisco home Tuesday evening to demand that she “investigate the corrupt justices” and “save abortion.”
“We will be marching to the front door of [Pelosi’s] Pac Heights mansion to demand: #SaveAbortionNancy #DefendRoe!,” Ruth Sent Us tweeted.
The group accused Pelosi of “careless and cowardly” leadership in the face of the Republican Party’s “scorched earth strategy.”
Well, this would be pretty interesting if Nancy was actually at home
(Newsweek) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rehashed her mantra of the U.S. needing a “strong Republican party,” not a “cult” while criticizing her Senate GOP colleagues’ record on climate change.
Speaking at the opening session of the Aspen Ideas Climate Conference in Miami, Pelosi said she hoped to make climate a “bipartisan issue.”
“You don’t want me to get too political here, do you?” Pelosi asked the audience.
“I mean, the fossil fuel industry, they weigh in so significantly,” she continued. “I mean, how could it be that nobody in the Senate cares about climate?
So, she took a fossil fueled flight from D.C. to Miami, followed by a fossil fueled vehicle, probably a big limo? No word if she left Tuesday or stayed in Miami, but, if she did leave, it was probably back to D.C., not the hellhole of San Francisco, so, the protesters probably annoyed her neighbors and servants who clean her house.
And she yammered something about the GOP supporting abortion
(Recount) Pelosi wanted the party to go back to its roots and back to the time when it cared for women’s rights and also the environment among other great things. She wondered how no one in the senate cared about the climate and the impact of fossil fuels on it. She claimed that though some members care about it they back out when it is time to vote.
She actually said “cared about a woman’s right to choose.” I don’t remember the GOP ever supporting abortion on demand. Further, if she’s not willing to practice what she preaches on ‘climate change’, why would anyone else?
Anyhow, after mixing the message a bit, the group is losing their you know what over Brett Kavanaugh and wants him investigated. If the group had any brains, they’d protest at Pelosi’s D.C. area home
As 2024 GOPher presidential candidate Sen Ted Cruz (Q-TX) ejaculated, these attacks on government officials (Pelosi, Kavanaugh, Alito) are much, much more violent than the peaceful protests on Jan 6!
LOL. Snowflake propagandist.
Given how the left have been picketing the homes of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts — who was probably in the minority of a 5-4 decision to overturn Roe v Wade — Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, all in violation of 18 USC §1507, the lovely Mrs Pelosi must surely support picketers in front of her own home.
Emphasis mine.
I can see how 18 USC §1507 could be in violation of the First Amendment’s protection of peaceable assembly, as long as the demonstrators were not trespassing on private property or threatening the Justices in any way, but, as we have previously seen with the Mostly Peaceful Protests™ of 2020, some such demonstrations have not been quite as peaceable as they might have been.
On the public sidewalk in front of Sen Susan Collins (R-ME) home: “Susie please, Mainers want the Women’s Health Protection Act. Vote yes, clean up your mess”
Sen Collins called the police.
Speaker Pelosi has not complained about the protests, unless we missed it.
The Mostly Peaceful Protests™ of Jan 6 were not available for comment.
The American right uses a demonstrably unConstitutional section of the US Code to squelch anti-government protests.
Did the Mostly Peaceful Protesters™ violate the law? Did any of them trespass onto Senatrix Collins’ property? We don’t know that. Speakess Pelosi wasn’t at her San Francisco home, so she couldn’t have called the cops on them.
18 USC §1507 refers to the residences of judges, jurors, witnesses or court officers, considering such attempts at intimidation as obstruction of justice. I’m pretty sure that, were a Republican on trial, and conservatives picketed the home of the judge in such a case, in an attempt to intimidate the judge, our sage from St Louis would want them arrested and prosecuted. But, at least so far, neither Attorney General Merrick Garland nor any of his minions have been attempting to prosecute such demonstrators in front of the homes of the Justices.
But, whatabout…
The killjoy from Kentucky, Mx Dana, suggests that AG Garland is not prosecuting protesters aggressively enough. Welcome to our world!
In direct violation of 18 USC §1507, on Jan 6 a group of MAGA hat wearing protesters gathered in front of Main Justice chanting “Do Your Job!”, wanting the then AG to intervene in the Big Lie in favor of the defeated tRump. Unless those protesters proceeded to the Capitol Building and battered police, broke windows and doors or committed other crimes it’s unlikely they were prosecuted for violating 18 USC §1507.
All of this brouhaha from the right is to distract from the brutal truth that citizens such as Mx Dana want to force a 12 year old Kentucky girl to carry her brother’s baby to term because they believe that a fertilized ovum is a person. The lives and rights of neither girls nor women deserve protection but a 1 hour old fertilized egg with a lower than 50% chance of implanting does.
The pro-birther contingent lies to us all when they say it’s about the freedom of states to choose life. Their objective is to enable government to outlaw all abortions at any stage so as to control those “loose women”.
Once they’ve consolidated their power in 2024, protections for trans people, same-sex marriage, contraception, privacy rights will be rescinded. By then, it will be too late for the moderate majority to respond by electoral means. They are building a bridge to the 90s. The 1890s. Welcome to the Caucaso-christo-fascist Republic of Gilead!
Poor J can’t quite understand civics 101 in which the people of each state will be able to elect representatives of their choice to decide their abortion laws if this decision goes as suspected..
Poor Jill can’t quite understand Civics 101 in which people of each state will decide blah, blah, blah… Can Arkansas vote to dump all their shit into the Mississippi River so that people of Louisiana have to deal with it? The Constitution is mute on that.
LOL! The curmudgeon from St Louis County wrote:
I stated that the Attorney General and his minions have not attempted to enforce 18 USC §1507 against the protesters outside of the Justice’s home. And it seems that he has gotten his marching orders from President Biden! Peppermint Patty said:
Translation: the President of the United States, the top federal law enforcement officer in the nation, via his mouthpiece, has urged pro-prenatal infanticide protesters to break the law, as long as they do it peacefully!
You really need to do your homework, Mr Dowd. 18 USC §1507, which I had previously both cited and quoted, refers to “any judge, juror, witness, or court officer.” It does not cite protests at the homes or offices of other federal, state, county, or municipal officials.
Of course, Merrick Garland, who absotively, posilutely hates Republicans for denying him a Supreme Court seat, has been prosecuting every Capitol kerfuffler he could find who entered the building, including Gracyn Courtright, who entered the Senate chamber, and witnessed violence by others but committed no violence herself, and many others overcharged but allowed to plead down to a single misdemeanor count, with no charges of any violent action.
LOL! Boo hoo from the Kid from Kintucky! The AG has had a whole day and hasn’t prosecuted even one protester!!
Do you really think the protests will influence Kavanaugh or Alito? They seriously can’t feel genuinely threatened.
We understand that connies are sticklers for “the law is the law”, especially applied to their enemies, but prosecutors can use their discretion. DonJon encouraged an insurrection but hasn’t been charged.
When duhSantis wins in 2024 his AG, Ted Cruz, can prosecute away and see if the prosecutions survive a 1st Amendment challenge. Good test case.
But we appreciate the full court press by connies and libbies to distract from the actual issue.
The distinguished Mr Dowd wrote:
Yeah? Well maybe if you guys didn’t set yourself up so badly!
Image from Libs of TikTok.
Does the extinguished Mx Dowd have a point?
Blah, blah, blah goes the atheist paid by China to stir up trouble in the USA in hopes of starting a civil war.
They are breaking the law by intimidating justices at their home. I wonder why Pelosi and the left have errected barriers around the capitol?
Not afraid of a little protest are you, Dowd?
We all know that these people are PAID agitators who would protest their own spouses if the pay was right.
Yesterday PSAKI just encouraged these protestors to BREAK THE LAW by saying we encourage them to continue their PEACEFUL PROTESTS IN FRONT OF JUDGES HOMES>….A clear violation of the law and an impeachable offense.
While the left drummed up lies to impeach trump the right needs no hidden evidence obtained by secret testimony in the basement of the capitol under guard. The greatest danger to America is NOT MAGA but PROGRESSIVES.
By all means impeach Jen Psaki. We thought far-right connies supported the original intent of the Constitution. Have you not read the 1st Amendment? Here’s a reminder:
What part of that don’t you understand? Wouldn’t a lawyer for a protester on a public street have a case that prosecution would be unConstitutional?? It seems far-right connies in their fascistic zeal are able to ignore our Constitution when it suits them. We all understand your lies and your intent.
In this case the far-right is taking away a woman’s right to privacy. What’s next? Will you tell when, how and with whom she can have sexual relations?
By the way, I’m not an atheist any more than you’re a Moonie. You’re not a Moonie, are you?
If you think China pays people to chat on little read blogs you probably also believe that tRump received more votes than President Biden. It’s more likely that you are paid by the FSB and the tRump/Putin coalition.
If you want to start a civil war you should overturn Roe v. Wade, start banning books, start punishing companies that criticize the government, overturn marriage equality, fix elections, ban labor unions, monitor the actions of all citizens at all times, eliminate the FDA, EPA, FBI etc. Maybe even declare martial law. This is where you’re headed.
Poor Qdowd, can’t quite understand Civics 101 in which people of each state will decide blah, blah, blah… Can Arkansas vote to dump all their shit into the Mississippi River so that people of Louisiana have to deal with it? The Constitution is mute on that.”
No the Constitution is not “mute” on that the ability for one state to effect another is covered by states rights and reciprocity. Also by written, undisputed law itself. Better get back to that Civics 101 class Qdowd.
People of each state have the right to self determination about any topic not SPECIFICALLY GIVEN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Sorry you don’t like a democratic republic but tuff shit. Why are you all so afraid of people voting their conscience in different states reflecting different life styles? Why must everyone in Tennessee have the same rules as those in New York? What is it about leftists that demands everyone conform to their desires regardless?
FJB and his commie admin.
Got it. States have rights, but citizens do not. You’re claiming a state can vote away the rights of certain citizens.
When the SC overturns Roe v. Wade and the FL GOPhers enact a law prohibiting FL women from leaving FL to obtain an abortion in another state, would you object to that law?
Funny-“banning books, labor unions…”. I see, as opposed to social media giants banning opposing points of view? And the difference between writing in a book or, say, on Twitter would be….what? And I don’t believe labor unions are banned, it’s just that in right to work states one can’t be forced to join or forced to pay union dues.
The difference between the government banning a book and corporation exercising editorial discretion shouldn’t need to be explained to a “patriot”.
If you read carefully you’ll discover we were projecting that the fascist right would strive to ban labor unions and that would be one component to trigger the civil war the fascist right desires.