Hysteria in the White House

Joe Biden and his minions have stoked the fires of hysteria following on the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion in the Dobbs case. I haven’t been able to find an embeddable video, but Biden talked about the decision today:

President Joe Biden delivered a sharp political speech from the White House on Wednesday warning of the “extreme” agenda from “MAGA” Republicans.

“This MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that has existed in American history,” Biden said, referring to the Make America Great Again movement sparked by former President Donald Trump.

A typically sane comment from Dementia Joe, which he later amended to say “recent” American history. Antifa? Hey, they’re middle of the road!

“This is about a lot more than abortion,” he said.

The president warned that Republicans might pass a law preventing “LGTBQ children” from attending public school with other children.

Of course, no Republican of any stripe has proposed any such thing. The idea is ridiculous.

“Let me tell you about this ultra-MAGA agenda, it’s extreme,” Biden said.

He also suggested that the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade could mean that government could regulate couples from using birth control.

This refers to Griswold v. Connecticut, a terrible Supreme Court decision that started in a Yale classroom and inaugurated the “right to privacy” that has bedeviled us ever since. Biden pretends not to understand the difference between something that is constitutionally required–a small universe–and something that is obviously a good idea and will happen regardless, i.e., the sale of contraceptives.

Jen Psaki, meanwhile, did a press briefing today in her usual hyperpartisan style. Peter Doucy followed up on Biden’s bizarre reference to LGBTQ children, but Psaki had no coherent explanation:

Q The President said today: “What happens if you have states change the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children?” What is he talking about?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think, Peter, we’ve seen extreme laws that target LGBTQ families, their kids across the country. And I think what he’s saying is: We don’t know what they’re capable of, given what they’ve already done to date.

Q Which state is trying to segregate LGBTQ children in the classroom?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think we’ve seen laws that are incredibly discriminatory. That’s what the President is referring to and the fact that he doesn’t know what additional steps could be taken by extreme wings of the party that would rather divide rather than work on issues that the American people actually are focused on and actually are impacting them.

The administration isn’t much concerned about the unprecedented, enormously damaging and perhaps illegal leak of a draft opinion being circulated among the justices:

Q Jen, back to abortion, if I can: Yesterday, you said the leak raises eyebrows, including for many here in the White House. But does the White House condemn — explicitly condemn this leak and — or has seeing this draft been seen as welcome by some here?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t think we have a particular view on that other than to say that we certainly note the unprecedented nature of it.

What we are mindful of — and I spoke with the President about exactly this question yesterday, and obviously it’s up to the Department of Justice to determine what, if any, action they will take. And I know, obviously, there have been calls for that from some Republicans but also members of the Supreme Court.

But our focus is on not losing sight from what the content is in the draft and what is at risk here. And while we have heard a number raised concerns about the leak, our focus is on highlighting what the content in there would risk — put at risk for women across the country.

Psaki was not willing to say that a decision overturning Roe v. Wade would be legitimate. Sort of like a presidential election, only with the shoe on the 2000, 2004 or 2016 foot.

Q And as for the content of the draft — the document, the draft — it is, of course, a draft — but if the Supreme Court does move to strike down Roe, should Americans be prepared to just accept that decision as legitimate? And would President Biden accept that decision as legitimate?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I can’t speak for what actions could be possible on the legal front; I would point you to the Department of Justice on that.

But what I can tell you will happen is — and this is what we are preparing for the possibility of — that if Roe were to fall, abortion would probably be illegal in about half the states in the country…

That is a false statement. I doubt that there would be any state in which abortion would be illegal. The Mississippi law that was the subject of the Dobbs case permitted abortions through 15 weeks.

…up to 26 states, particularly in the South, the Midwest, and West, who have all spoken out — many leaders — about how they’re poised to restrict or ban access. …

… And as a result of all of this, tens of millions of women may lack access to reproductive healthcare services…

“Reproductive health care services” means killing unborn babies.

…as soon as this summer, if that were a decision to be made.

There is much more at the link. Suffice it to say that the Biden administration is doubling down on killing the largest possible number of unborn babies as a core principle of the Democratic Party. I am not sure this will work out as well for them as they seem to expect.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.