Far-Left Lawmaker Scolds Fellow Dem For Criticizing Party On Transgender Ideology
'I just find that to be an offensive comment'
Is the abortion pill as ‘safe’ as Advil? Democrats say yes
Abortion is the biggest issue that the Democrat Party is running on, but Democrats never tell you how dangerous the procedure really is.
Which is why when young mother Amber Thurman died after taking the abortion pill, the mainstream media went after the abortion laws in Thurman’s home state of Georgia rather than the pill that killed her.
“She left Georgia, where she could not get an abortion at the time of her pregnancy that she was in, she went to another state, got abortion pills, took them, came back, was told everything is going to be fine, no big deal,” Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” explains.
“She took them, had a very, very big deal, and she wound up going to the hospital. They didn’t treat her for a long time, and she wound up dying. Now, she didn’t go to the hospital because of the Georgia abortion law. She went to the hospital because the pills she was told were going to be totally innocuous wound up putting her in a situation where she needed to go to the hospital,” he adds.
The babies in her womb were already dead from the abortion pill, so no abortion laws would have applied to her situation when she went to the hospital. The poor infants were not evacuated from her system, so that’s when sepsis set in.
While the Democrats jumped on this story because they felt they could mess with the truth and pin Thurman’s death on abortion laws, one story they ignored was the case of Eliana Dickson.
Dickson, a Nevada woman, also died of sepsis after taking abortion pills.
“You might note that Nevada does not have the Georgia abortion law,” Stu says, commenting that these women are sold a much different idea by doctors, politicians, and the media — so they have no idea what they could be getting themselves into.
“If you have a woman in your life that, God forbid, has gone down this road and is having these problems, please let them know, because the media is not going to do that. They’re going to do the exact opposite of that. They’re going to try to hide that information from them because they want political points. It’s disgusting,” he adds.
And they don’t just hide that information, but they lie about it.
CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins even compared the abortion drug mifepristone’s “safety” to being “on par with those of common over-the-counter pain relievers like ibuprofen and acetaminophen.”
“Forget for just a moment all the stats I’m about to bring up and just, does that pass the sniff test to you? Have you ever had Tylenol? Have you ever had Advil?” Stu asks, disturbed. “Do you think that has a safety profile equal to the abortion drug? Do you think that? But no, experts are telling you it, so it must be so.”
Want more from Stu?
To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Here’s How The Media Are Lying Right Now: CNN’s Reliable Propaganda Edition
CNN's Brian Stelter self-identifies as a reporter, but all he does is lie on behalf of the media, Kamala Harris, and the Democrat Party.CNN anchor tries to stop Tom Cotton from telling the truth about IVF bill — but she fails: 'You're not going to stop me'
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) refused on Tuesday to allow CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins to block him from telling the truth about an IVF-related bill.
Earlier in the day, the Senate failed to pass a bill that would provide federal protections for IVF. It was the second time the bill failed after nearly every Republican senator voted against it. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) were the only Republicans who voted for it.
'No, Kaitlan, you're not going to stop me there.'
The Democratic narrative quickly became that Republicans are once again trying to restrict rights and block fertility care.
Collins herself parroted that narrative. Before introducing Cotton onto her show, she said:
Senate Republicans today blocked a bill that would guarantee access to the very thing that a lot of them say they support. It's also the very thing that we have heard Donald Trump say that he supports. Democrats tried and failed, again, to pass that measure, which would guarantee access to IVF nationwide. And tonight, they are using this vote to hammer Republicans who said, "No."
When it was finally Cotton's turn to speak, he told Collins that he needed to "correct almost everything you said in the lede in there."
"First off, there's no risk to IVF in this country. All 49 Republican senators, along with President Trump, support IVF. No state restricts or bans IVF," Cotton explained. "Second, this bill was about a lot more than just IVF."
Despite having laid out only those two basic facts, Collins immediately became defensive. Cotton, however, clarified the facts about what the bill actually includes.
"You said that it had to guarantee access. Access is guaranteed in all 50 states right now," he explained. "You also said that it was about IVF. It's about a lot more than IVF. This bill would mandate coverage for experimental controversial procedures, like cloning or gene editing or providing fertility treatments to men who think they're women, whatever that means."
And when Cotton tried to explain how the bill "would also imperil religious liberties" — by allegedly compelling Christians to operate against their conscience — Collins tried to interrupt the senator.
"Let's stop you there," she said.
"No, Kaitlan, you're not going to stop me there," Cotton fired back. "Because you're misrepresenting what the bill is about. The bill is about infringing upon religious liberty."
As the interview went on, Collins repeatedly defended the bill, claiming "it would have guaranteed access to IVF." But Cotton was forced time and again to remind her that IVF access is prima facie guaranteed already because not a single state restricts it.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Top Georgia official lands knockout blow after Stacey Abrams gets mad when CNN anchor calls her out for election denialism
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) is once again setting the record straight.
On Wednesday, CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins confronted Democrat Stacey Abrams over her rhetoric about the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race. Despite losing the race to now-Gov. Brian Kemp (R), Abrams told supporters that she actually "won" the race, she refused to concede her loss, and she even claimed the race was "stolen."
'The latest comments from Stacey Abrams show that she still can’t accept that she lost in 2018.'
Collins asked Abrams whether she "regrets" her past claims. The innocent question clearly frustrated Abrams.
The twice-failed gubernatorial candidate responded by chiding Collins to "go back to elementary school," claiming she didn't contest the 2018 election outcome itself, but the "process that was used," and alleged the "courts agreed with us."
When Collins pushed back — citing Abrams' own words — Abrams immediately interjected and stopped Collins from talking.
"Well, I do remember the time you told the New York Times, 'I won.' You did describe it as a stolen election. The courts did side with the secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger—" Collins said before she was cut off.
"Kaitlan, that's actually incorrect," Abrams interjected. "And normally, I wouldn't cut you off. But you're repeating disinformation."
Abrams claimed a 2022 court decision that ruled against her claims actually ruled in her favor. She accused Collins of only reading "headlines" to the detriment of the "fine print."
Raffensperger responds
Is Abrams telling the truth? Is Collins guilty of spewing "disinformation"? Not according to Raffensperger.
"In my time in office, I have spent a lot of time holding failed candidates like Stacey Abrams accountable to Georgia's voters," he said in a statement. "The latest comments from Stacey Abrams show that she still can’t accept that she lost in 2018. And the fact that she still can’t accept that means she has no business going on TV talking about defending democracy."
The truth of the matter, Raffensperger added, is that Abrams "lost fair and square under the established rules of the game."
"She even spent over $50 million of her donors’ money to try to show that the rules were unfair to her, but she completely lost on all her claims," he explained.
"She lost not because of any technicality like she now tries to claim, but because, after getting millions of documents and conducting hundreds of depositions, the evidence didn’t support her claims," he wrote. "She had every chance in the world to prove her claims of 'systematic voter suppression' and she couldn’t do it because her claims were nothing but cheap, political talking points."
Raffensperger accused Abrams of using "flowery language about protecting the right to vote" to obscure the fact "that she is just an election denier."
"She wants everyone to forget that her group continually referred to the 2018 election as a 'stolen election' and referred to Governor Kemp as Governor* Kemp for many months after he was legitimately elected and sworn in," Raffensperger went on to say. "But Abrams and Fair Fight did both of those things, and they should be ashamed.
"The only thing she should be going on TV to say is that she lost the 2018 election fair and square and that she apologizes for her post-election refusal to accept that fact," he said.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Tom Cotton ruins CNN anchor's narrative about Trump when he points out inconvenient facts about Biden, Harris
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) turned the tables on CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins on Wednesday when she tried to corner him over remarks former President Donald Trump made earlier in the day.
At a National Association of Black Journalists event, Trump fielded racially loaded questions in a mostly hostile environment. At one point, he appeared to question Vice President Kamala Harris' racial heritage, comments that stirred up more controversy.
'Four years ago, Joe Biden said if you don't vote for him, 'you ain't black.' Could you imagine a more insulting comment?'
But instead of questioning Cotton about Senate business, Collins essentially demanded that Cotton answer for Trump.
Unfortunately for Collins, the Arkansas Republican was not in the mood to play a game of identity politics. What actually matters, Cotton said, is "the fact that [Harris] identifies as a San Francisco liberal" and that her record as vice president, a presidential candidate, and as a state and local politician is "dangerous."
That response, however, wasn't sufficient for Collins, who repeatedly diverted the interview back to Trump's remarks.
But at every instance, Cotton spoke clearly about the contrast between Trump and Harris.
— (@)
Finally, Cotton had enough and highlighted previous remarks from both Harris and Biden that complicate the media's narrative that purports Trump to be racist.
"My point is when are you and the rest of the media going to demand that Kamala Harris come out and answer questions in an unscripted format about where she stands for this country, as opposed to continuing to focus on what Donald Trump said today?" Cotton said. "Four years ago, Joe Biden said, 'If you don't vote for him, you ain't black.' Could you imagine a more insulting comment? Joe Biden is presuming to judge the political views of one-eighth of our fellow citizens based on their skin color.
"Did you ever ask Kamala Harris to condemn his remarks?" he asked.
At that moment, Collins began talking over Cotton and repeatedly interrupted him.
"But, senator, this is a question — you're a Republican senator," she said. "So, I would ask you about the Republican — the Republican nominee."
"Kaitlan, did you ask Kamala Harris why she's willing to serve as a vice president for a man she essentially called racist and a segregationist?" Cotton fired back.
"OK. Well—" Collins responded.
"Have you or anyone else in the media asked Kamala Harris those questions, Kaitlan?" Cotton followed up.
Collins, whose ratings are abysmal, did not answer Cotton's questions. She simply implored Cotton to "trust" her because she has "covered the Biden-Harris White House."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
CNN anchor confronts Nathan Wade with key question about relationship with Fani Willis — then his 'consultant' steps in
A media consultant for Nathan Wade abruptly interrupted a sit-down interview with CNN that aired on Wednesday.
Wade is the former special prosecutor whom Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) hired to help lead the racketeering case against Donald Trump for alleged election interference. That case nearly imploded earlier this year when Wade's romantic relationship with Willis became public. Wade later stepped down, and a judge allowed the case to proceed.
'The public has a clear snapshot that this is clearly just a distraction. It is not a relevant issue in this case.'
About 20 minutes into an interview, CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins asked Wade a question about his relationship that his handlers didn't like.
"Just to clarify, when did the romantic relationship between the two of you start?" Collins asked.
That question is important because Wade and Willis testified under oath that their relationship began after Willis hired Wade as a special prosecutor. If the contrary is true, it means that both attorneys have perjured themselves and tainted the election interference case.
At first, Wade began to answer the question, albeit with stumbling answers about "exact dates." But his off-screen "media consultant" abruptly stopped him from providing a substantive answer.
— (@)
For nearly a minute, Wade and his consultant huddled together off-screen and discussed how to answer the question.
Microphones, unfortunately, did not pick up any of the conversation.
"Everything OK?" Collins asked when Wade returned to his chair.
But now, instead of providing an answer to the question, Wade appeared more disciplined and dodged the question completely.
"I believe that the public has — through the testimony and other interviews — the public has a clear snapshot that this is clearly just a distraction," Wade said. "It is not a relevant issue in this case. And I think that we should be focusing on more of the facts and the indictment in the case."
When Collins pushed for an answer, Wade refused to say anything of substance.
It's not clear, moreover, why Wade did not want to answer the question if it is true that his relationship with Willis began when they both claim it did.
Contrary to Wade's claims, details about when Willis and Wade began their relationship are very relevant to the Trump case because the Fulton County DA's office paid Wade substantial sums of money for his work and, as some defense attorneys in the case have argued, the romantic relationship allowed Willis to benefit financially from prosecuting Trump.
If the romantic relationship began before the investigation was initiated, defense attorneys will argue the case is tainted by unethical behavior that violates the defendants' due process rights.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com