Match Exact Phrase    

Whatfinger: Frontpage For Conservative News Founded By Veterans



"The Best Mix Of Hard-Hitting REAL News & Cutting-Edge Alternative News On The Web"


Share This

  


September 22, 2020

Justice Ginsburg, Eugenics And The Democrats 'Big Lie' - 'The Unborn Child Will Have No Right To Live Until Their Birth If Justice Ginsburg’s Legal Project Outlives Her'  

- 'If it succeeds, American law will become completely pro-choice'



With 'political violence' from 'the left' highly likely to leave bloodshed in America over the coming six weeks leading up to the election and the probability that things will then be kicked up a few notches if President Trump wins, as Susan Duclos had warned in this September 21st story on ANP, Democrats are now biting off a bit more than they can chew with media personalities, Democrat politicians and Hollywood names calling for violence against President Trump supporters. 

As J.D. Heyes had warned in this new story over at Natural News, leftists exploded following Ginsburg’s death, threatening to “burn down” the country and leave bodies in the streets if President Trump and the GOP tried to replace her prior to the election.

And with parts of America already on fire long before RBG's death, the fact that Attorney General William Barr's DOJ actually had to declare 3 US cities 'anarchist zones', meaning they could lose millions/billions of dollars in federal funding, confirms what we've long been reporting but the mainstream media has largely been avoiding: Democrats have allowed their cities to turn into boiling cauldrons of hatred and anger to push home a political point and stir up their 'mob' for revolution. 

And while the Natural News story points out that 'big tech' is pushing this 'revolution' along, none of us should be at all surprised by what Democrats are doing to America, especially with many globalists/democrats long holding, if not openly talking about, their 'depopulation agenda'. From Natural News before we continue.: 

Proving once again why the Democratic Party, home to the American Left, should never, ever be given the reins of power again because their Stalinists and Leninists, “blue checks” on Twitter threatened to burn up the country and leave bodies in the streets “literally” if President Trump and the Republican Senate name a successor to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg following her Friday death from pancreatic cancer. 
 
“If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f**king thing down,” Reza Aslan, an Iranian-American and former CNN contributor who claims to be a ‘religious scholar’ tweeted. 
 
He would later tweet in response to a statement from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who vowed to give any nominee made by Trump a vote, “Over our dead bodies. Literally.”

(ANP Fundraiser: If you like stories like this, please consider donating to ANP to help keep us in this 'Info-war' for America at this most critical time in US history as we approach the 2020 election during a time of systematic 'big tech' censorship and widespread Democrat corruption)




As Heyes continued to warn in his story, while many dismiss these leftist threats of 'burning down the country' and 'shutting the country down' as 'leftists babbling in anger and despair' following the death of their 'infanticide hero', if we were to look at all of what's happened over the past 4 years as 'a play', this 'latest buildup' would be seen as the 'acts and scenes of conflict and complication' prior to what would become a shocking and climactic conclusion. 

And if we look at everything now happening through the eyes of history, we'll see that once again, the far left politicians (and media) are using their 'useful idiots' to try to accomplish political goals, and if they have to burn down America to do so, 'so be it' in their eyes. Once again, from Natural News

Now, granted, for the most part, it would be easy to wave off the threats made by these lunatic threats as hyperbole — were it not for the fact that our country has just endured months of rioting, looting and statue-toppling violence, ostensibly in the name of a career criminal in Minneapolis who may have died a wrongful death but who certainly does not deserve sainthood. 
 
And we might be able to dismiss them if we weren’t already aware of a sinister plot by the Stalinist Democrat Left to try and steal the election in November with waves of fake mail-in ballots and endless lawsuits — many of which would ultimately wind up before the Supreme Court, making that the No. 1 reason why the president and the Senate GOP have to put a successor on the high court. 
 
So the threats have to be taken seriously, even if the whiny, butt-hurt leftist Twitter warriors are making them from the safety of their homes and basements aren’t actually going to be the ‘heroes’ lining the streets readying for battle. 
 
Because as we’ve seen all summer long, there are hidden forces behind the current violent protests — organizing them, funding them and, reportedly, transporting them.
 
With a humiliating election crushing possibly only weeks away, a thrashing that we hope will send this particular group of anti-freedom, anti-America Democrats packing for good. as Susan Duclos had warned in this September 19th ANP story, such a defeat would completely unleash the mayhem from Democrats we've already been witnessing building up over the past 4 years, and particularly this summer. Yet as we'll explore in the final section of this story below, if Democrats were only paying attention to just WHO they're 'rioting for', they'd see the bigger picture most are missing.   

 
All the way back on July 7th of 2009, the NY Times published this story titled "The Place Of Women On The Court" within which they interviewed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and to say in 2020 that some of her answers would be 'shocking' to those paying close attention to her words would be an understatement. 

While we linked above to that Times story to prove that it is indeed on their website, it's also been saved here over at Archive.com for history and as this story over at The Stream points out, within that 2009 interview, RBG does nothing less than endorse eugenics for 'certain populations' in America. 

We'll go ahead and publish this excerpt from the NY Times story for you to read and let sink in before we continue.:

NY Times: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women? 

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong." 

And while several years later, Ginsburg attempted to 'clear up' her stance and the alleged confusion surrounding her views on abortion and 'population control', while many claim her statement proved that she and her peers upon the US Supreme Court wanted legalized abortion to reduce the number of poor and minority people, as The Stream story pointed out, it was actually much worse than that: 

The critics’ reading — Ginsburg admits it! Liberals want to get rid of poor people! — was unfair. It wasn’t the most honest of readings. And there’s a cost to dishonesty. You miss the thing you must see. 
 
You don’t see how clever and how radical Ginsburg’s promotion of abortion rights really was. Ginsburg wanted to drive legal abortion into the Constitution. She wanted to make it a right equal to the First Amendment rights, even though the text never mentions it. 
 
Indeed, she even wanted to make it a superior right, in that the government should fund it, because the government has to make sure everyone can enjoy it. The government can’t fund newspapers just because the Constitution guarantees freedom of the press. But it should fund abortions because without them women can’t be completely equal to men. 
 
She explained this to the Senate in her confirmation testimony, back in 1993. Any law against abortion “controls women and denies them full autonomy and full equality with men.” Pregnancy puts women at a disadvantage compared with men. “It is essential to woman’s equality with man that she be the decisionmaker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints that impede her choice, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.” 
 
A Simple Argument 
 
Ginsburg didn’t like basing abortion in the woman’s right to privacy, as the Roe court did. That leaves open the possibility of balancing her right to privacy with her unborn child’s right to live. She wasn’t proposing abortion as a tragic necessity, a way out for women who just can’t have a child. She didn’t talk about abortion being “safe, legal, and rare,” as the Clintons once did. Those arguments also allow for restrictions. 
 
None of that halfway stuff. She offered a simple argument: The Constitution demands women have complete equality with men; the inability to free themselves of a fetus keeps them from that equality; therefore, the Constitution demands that abortion be completely legal. 
 
She implied, at least, a second argument: The Constitution demands women have complete equality with each other; any inability — being poor, being too far from an abortionist, and so on — keeps them from that equality; therefore, the Constitution demands that the government ensure every women’s ability to procure an abortion, paying for the abortion if necessary. 
 
Simple arguments. Elegant arguments. Clean, neat, without the practical messiness of the halfway arguments. Based on an ideal of equality that nearly everyone agrees with. Recognizing a reality everyone knows. Arguably respectful of the Constitution itself in a way Roe wasn’t. And justifying the killing of tens of millions of human beings
 
Justice Ginsburg’s legal project will outlive her. If it succeeds, American law will become completely pro-choice. The unborn child will have no right to live till birth.

In the only video below from over at Brighteon we're warned that the death of RBG is leading to the radicalization of bloodthirsty leftists all across the country, something that we all should be prepared for in the coming 6 weeks into 2021. 




PLEASE DONATE TO ANP: With non-stop censorship and 'big tech' attacks upon independent media, donations from readers are absolutely critical in keeping All News Pipeline online. So if you like stories like this, please consider donating to ANP.

All donations are greatly appreciated and will absolutely be used to keep us in this fight for the future of America.

Thank you and God Bless. Susan and Stefan.


PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.


One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:

btn_donateCC_LG.gif

Or https://www.paypal.me/AllNewsPipeLine

Donate monthly from $1 up by becoming an ANP Patron.

PatreonButton1.jpg

Donate Via Snail Mail

Checks or money orders made payable to Stefan Stanford or Susan Duclos can be sent to:

P.O. Box 575
McHenry, MD. 21541

DONATEANP1.jpg












WordPress Website design by Innovative Solutions Group - Helena, MT
comments powered by Disqus

Web Design by Innovative Solutions Group