MASSIVE WIN: Planned Parenthood takes major hit to abortion 'care'



The Supreme Court has ruled that South Carolina has the power to block Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood clinics — and liberals have once again taken an opportunity to fire off pro-abortion messages as if their lives depend on it.

“I’m happy to have a conversation, a back-and-forth, a civil discussion about the merit of the pro-life argument, but when the other side is literally screaming, screaming, literally screaming, and having an epic meltdown over less babies being killed in the womb,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments, “we’re past reason.”

The case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, centered on whether low-income Medicaid patients can sue under Section 1983 in order to choose their own qualified health care provider.


South Carolina had blocked Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, which the organization argued violated a federal law. However, in a 6-3 decision, the Court did not side with Planned Parenthood — and now all states can block Medicaid from funding Planned Parenthood clinics.

While federal law already prevented Medicaid from funding abortions, Planned Parenthood had a loophole.

“Planned Parenthood will tell you they just offer health care, they’re just here for women’s reproductive health, it’s all health care,” Gonzales says.

“And so, the way that this defunds Planned Parenthood, this law, is that Planned Parenthood receives 33% to 43% of its total revenue, that’s $2.03 billion dollars, from the government each year,” she explains, “Medicaid reimbursements account for about 75% of that funding. So if you do the math, that’s like $600 [or] $700 mil.”

“But about 50% of Planned Parenthood’s patient visits are covered by Medicaid. That’s 5 million annual visits,” she continues, noting that the left is now acting as if their access to health care has been cut.

“There are federally qualified health centers that are nationwide. There’s, I think, like, 1,300 centers that serve 13 million-plus patients. You’ve got county and city public health clinics that accept Medicaid, and I mean, they do all this while not killing babies,” she says, adding, “It’s almost like the left’s argument on killing babies is entirely disingenuous and evil.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Michelle Obama makes bizarre pro-abortion argument: The 'least' of what the female body does 'is produce life'



Former first lady Michelle Obama appealed to pro-abortion Americans by claiming a woman's reproductive system is not primarily intended for bearing children.

On her podcast, "IMO," Mrs. Obama and her guests discussed an alleged bias against women among lawmakers and the pharmaceutical industry, leading to a discussion in support of abortion on demand.

'So many men have no idea about what women go through. Right? We haven't been researched. We haven't been considered.'

Co-host Craig Robinson kicked off the festivities by asking guest Dr. Sharon Malone, an ob-gyn, where women should go to get "proper information" regarding reproductive care, in vitro fertilization, menopause, and more. This related to Obama, as she suffered a miscarriage in the late 1990s and later used IVF to conceive her daughters, Malia and Sasha.

Without answering the question, the doctor immediately shifted to accusing the pharmaceutical industry of not advancing products for women out of bias, "because there's no money to be made" there.

This set Obama off on a tangent about abortions, during which she claimed a lack of investment has led to difficult decisions for pregnant women.

RELATED: Obama judge blocks Trump — gives Harvard, foreign nationals what they want at America's expense

"So many men have no idea about what women go through. Right? We haven't been researched," Obama claimed.

"We haven't been considered, and it still affects the way a lot of male lawmakers, a lot of male politicians, a lot of male religious leaders think about the issue of choice, as if it's just about the fetus, the baby. But women's reproductive health is about our life."

The explanation fell short of a compelling argument, however, with Obama saying that producing children is actually the "least" important function of a woman's reproductive system.

"It's about this whole complicated reproductive system that does — the least of what it does is produce life. It's a very important thing that it does, but you only produce life if the machine that's producing it — if you wanna, you know, whittle us down to a machine — is functioning in a healthy, streamlined kind of way."

She added, "But there is no discussion or apparent connection between the two."

RELATED: David Hogg spills the beans to undercover reporter about who really controlled the Biden White House

US President Barack Obama, first lady Michelle Obama, and daughters Malia and Sasha walk to board Air Force One at Cape Cod Air Force Station in Massachusetts on August 21, 2016. NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images

Blaze News spoke to Emily Erin Davis, VP of communications for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, who said hearing Obama's comments was "heartbreaking."

"It's sad to see someone who once represented our country speak about women and children this way," Davis said. "Comments like these don't just devalue motherhood — they devalue womanhood itself."

Similarly, Blaze News' Rebeka Zeljko described Obama's remarks as "absurd" and "damaging to women."

"Many women regard motherhood as their greatest, most fulfilling accomplishment. The only people who 'whittle us down to a machine' are those who dehumanize unborn children and equate an abortion with taking a Tylenol."

After Obama's obscure explanation about women's bodies, Dr. Malone asserted that a woman must "have control over her body, when and if to have a baby, and to decide how that pregnancy should continue."

The doctor insisted she was not referring to abortion, however, and said she was referring only to a miscarriage or when the mother's life is in danger.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The abortion pill crisis Big Pharma doesn’t want you to see



A bombshell new study has found that women are suffering serious harm from chemical abortions at a rate 22 times higher than what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or abortion pill manufacturers are reporting to patients.

The federal government must step in now to protect women. It can no longer shirk its responsibility by “leaving it up to the states.”

If a drug is this dangerous, Big Pharma should not be allowed to hide its risks from women.

The study from the Ethics and Public Policy Center, which analyzed insurance claims of 330 million U.S. patients and over 850,000 cases of mifepristone abortions since 2017, is the largest and most comprehensive study ever conducted on the effects of America’s most common chemical abortion drug.

The numbers don’t lie

While the FDA and abortion drug manufacturers tout serious side effects in only 0.5% of cases, actual insurance claims from patients reveal the number is much higher: Nearly one in nine women experience severe or life-threatening events within 45 days of taking mifepristone, including sepsis, hemorrhaging, blood transfusion, infection, and surgeries tied directly to the abortion drug.

Nearly two-thirds of abortions in the United States are now chemical, according to the Planned Parenthood-founded Guttmacher Institute, suggesting that hundreds of thousands of women over the past 10 years have suffered serious complications. That is neither “rare” nor “safe” by any definition.

By contrast, according to the EPPC, the federal government’s claims of the drug’s “safety” rely on small, outdated trials — some conducted over 40 years ago — on a combined total of only 31,000 mostly healthy women in doctor-controlled environments.

In real-world environments, however, the abortion drug has proven significantly more dangerous.

The EPPC study found 10.93% of women suffered significant harm from taking the drug. What other FDA-approved drug would remain on the market with such a high rate of serious adverse events?

No state is safe

In light of this data, the federal government can no longer justify the lifting of oversight protocols for the abortion drug. Under Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, critical safety measures — such as in-person supervision by a doctor and adverse event reporting — were eliminated. These federal safeguards must be restored, and the drug’s safety and FDA approval must be re-evaluated.

This is not a mere “states issue.” Abortion drugs are often shipped across state lines without a doctor’s involvement. Pro-abortion states like California should not be allowed to pump this dangerous drug into Texas or other states that have enacted reasonable protections for women and their babies.

The leaders we send to Washington, D.C., cannot hide behind federalism on this issue under the guise of “leaving it up to the states.” If just one aggressively pro-abortion state is allowed to ship abortion pills nationwide, women across all 50 states remain at risk — even if the other 49 state legislatures vote to protect them.

Women deserve the truth

Regardless of opinions on abortion, all Americans should agree on this: Women have a right to accurate information about the drugs they take. If a drug is this dangerous, Big Pharma should not be allowed to hide its risks from women. And the FDA cannot turn a blind eye, becoming complicit in a cover-up.

We must demand that the FDA take action. I’ve joined with dozens of pro-family leaders nationwide in writing a letter to President Donald Trump urging him to act. The letter reads, in part:

All the original safety protocols on mifepristone must be restored, and the FDA must investigate mifepristone, reconsidering its approval altogether. The lives of women and unborn children and the rights of states depend on it.

Furthermore, here in Iowa — home of the first-in-the-nation presidential caucus — we are committed to making safeguarding women from the dangers of mifepristone an issue for any candidate who seeks to follow President Trump in the White House. We urge voters to ask the same of any of their candidates: If you seek federal office, will you insist on seeing the safeguarding of women as a federal issue?

She used to be pro-choice — until a Facebook comment changed her mind



As one of the most vocal conservative advocates for the pro-life cause, it may come as a shock to some that Allie Beth Stuckey used to be pro-choice — but without realizing it.

“I’ve always considered myself pro-life. I just have known reflexively and because I was raised in a Christian household that abortion is wrong, that it’s killing a human being, and that that is wrong, but I also knew that there were these rare exceptions that I thought needed to happen sometimes,” Stuckey explains on “Relatable.”

“I posted something to that effect on Facebook; I guess maybe I just adopted the general Republican position that yes, abortion is wrong, should be illegal, but there’s rape, there’s incest, there’s fetal anomalies. And I thought that was a sophisticated, nuanced, but fully pro-life position,” she continues.


When Stuckey posted this to Facebook, someone replied in the comments asking what the difference is between a baby conceived in rape and a baby not conceived in rape.

“That comment stopped me in my tracks,” she recalls. “I think that really had a big effect on how I started thinking about abortion, but I realized either in that moment or just over time that I was thinking about abortion, even as someone who called myself staunchly pro-life, as an abstract issue, as a political issue, and not from the perspective of the baby, and not really as murder.”

When she changed the lens through which she was viewing what she thought was just a “procedure,” she ultimately changed her mind.

“I wasn’t thinking about it in realistic, stark, terms, and that is that it murders a child and that the humanity of that person that’s being killed does not change based on the circumstances surrounding its conception,” she explains.

“I don’t know who that commenter was, but I’m thankful for them,” she continues, adding, “And you just never know how God is going to use your insistence upon speaking the truth in love.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Colorado Democrats: State can save money by funding abortion, killing 30% more babies



Colorado Democrats are more than willing to blow taxpayer money on programs for illegal aliens; however, when it comes to coverage for American mothers and their unborn babies, they will apparently appeal to lethal ways to reduce spending.

State Democrats are advancing legislation that would enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution; require the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to fund abortions for Medicaid and Child Health Plan Plus program participants using taxpayer dollars; and force public employee insurance plans to fund abortions for plan members — something they are not presently required to do.

Senate Bill 183 — a consequence of Colorado voters' overwhelming support last year for Colorado Amendment 79, which set the stage for the use of public funds for abortion — passed the state Senate in a 22-12 party-line vote on March 12.

Prior to the bill passing the committee on health and human services on Tuesday, Colorado House Speaker Julie McCluskie (D), a prime sponsor of the legislation, indicated that the use of taxpayer funds to kill babies could save the state a little bit of money.

"That savings comes from the averted births that will not occur because abortions happened instead," McCluskie said in a video shared to social media. "So a birth is more expensive than an abortion — so the saving comes in Medicaid births that will not occur."

"This bill will actually decrease costs for our health care policy and financing department, our Medicaid expenditures, in both this year and out years as the savings from averted births outweigh the costs of covering reproductive health care for all Coloradans," continued McCluskie, who was endorsed last year by Planned Parenthood.

'Abortion care services represent a one-time expenditure.'

While the Colorado House speaker indicated the state will initially see an "increase to general fund of $1.5 million," over time, the taxpayer-subsidized elimination of human life will ultimately lead to "cost savings."

McCluskie was referencing a state fiscal analysis that made the following assumptions and assertions:

  • 333,330 women ages 15 to 44 will be enrolled in Medicaid or the Child Health Plan Plus program in fiscal year 2025-2026;
  • 1.67% of members from this cohort will seek abortions each year;
  • 50.4% of abortions will be performed "procedurally" and 49.6% will be chemical abortions;
  • "abortion procedures are assumed to be reimbursed at a rate of $1,300, and medication abortions are assumed to be reimbursed at a rate of $800";
  • taxpayer-funded abortions through Medicaid/CHP+ will increase the number of unborn babies killed by 30%; and
  • the average reimbursement cost for child birth is $3,850, which is funded by state and federal programs.

According to Democrats' calculus, abortions will not only save the state on total reimbursement costs for the delivery of children but will likely also spare the state from having to deal with additional costs that might arise in relation to human beings whose lives they failed to "avert."

"Medicaid-covered births typically involve additional social safety net impacts for the child, whereas abortion care services represent a one-time expenditure. These impacts have not been addressed in this fiscal note," said the fiscal note on SB 183.

"On net, the bill will decrease costs for HCPF by about $286,000 in FY 2025-26 and $573,000 in FY 2026-27 and ongoing," continued the fiscal note. "These impacts are the net result of increased costs for abortion services and decreased costs from averted births."

State Rep. Kenneth G. DeGraaf (R) tweeted, "Holy Human-Haters, Batman! 'Killing people is less expensive than caring for them' coming soon from a eugenicist near you."

"Paying for abortions for low income women will save our state millions of dollars on 'averted births,'" wrote Republican state Rep. Brandi Bradley. "Margaret Sanger would be so proud."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump Derangement Syndrome: State Rep Sterilizes Herself To Protest President

'Treated as currency'

Blaze News original: Crushed faces, broken legs, knockout punches just tip of the iceberg in savage attacks on pro-lifers



The risks pro-life advocates take these days when they head to the streets and tell others that abortion is wrong are numerous and dire.

In this roundup, we'll be taking a look at how some of them were physically attacked over their convictions.

'She just absolutely glared at me. She grabbed me by both of my shoulders and ... pitched me across the sidewalk. I landed on my left side and my left arm and my head.'

But physical attacks are only a part of what pro-life advocates face. Leftists who bully, intimidate, and harass them can make the prospect of protesting on behalf of the unborn downright scary, too.

Readers of Blaze News likely haven't forgotten the outrageous behavior of then-Pennsylvania state Rep. Brian Sims, a leftist who posted video of himself harassing an "old white lady" saying the rosary near a Philadelphia Planned Parenthood in 2019.

Brian K. SimsImage source: Pennsylvania House of Representatives, archives

That ain't the half of it. Sims also offered $100 for the identities of young women praying in front of the same abortion facility. The mother of the teen girls soon told Tucker Carlson that Sims "came in hot ... yelling" at them and that she had to intervene. In the end, Sims' bullying sparked a pro-life rally in front of the Planned Parenthood featuring speakers such as Matt Walsh, Live Action president and founder Lila Rose, and iconic pro-life leader Abby Johnson.

Oh, and does anyone remember the assistant principal from a Pennsylvania high school who resigned after he was caught on video in April 2017 screaming and cursing at teenage pro-life advocates on a public sidewalk in front of the school? Check out the still-startling video here.

Zach Ruff, then dean of academics and student life at the STEM Academy in Downingtown, pointed at a sign one of the teen activists was holding that showed a photo of an aborted fetus and told the teen, “You can go to hell, where they are, too.”

When the teen suggested that Ruff turn to Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of his sins, Ruff stood inches from the teen's face and issued a scorching rebuttal: “Listen here, son, all right? I’m as gay as the day is long and twice as sunny. I don’t give a f**k what you think Jesus tells me and what I should and should not be doing.”

The teens received a settlement that summer acknowledging that they had every right to be on that sidewalk. In a December 2017 article by the Philadelphia Inquirer, Ruff told the paper he takes several medications, sees a therapist twice weekly, and rarely leaves the house without his husband.

Then you have alleged intimidation courtesy of the FBI and by the likes of Jane's Revenge. How about an outspoken Democrat elected official who issued "literally a call to arms" against the pro-life movement?

If that isn't enough to contend with, let's now take a look at some of what has happened when leftists got physical with pro-lifers.

Elderly pro-lifer beaten to a pulp in vicious, unprovoked attack outside Planned Parenthood; another elderly pro-lifer knocked out cold in same attack, witness says


Pro-life advocate Mark Crosby, 73, was severely beaten in a vicious, unprovoked attack outside a Planned Parenthood in Baltimore in May 2023, and a witness said a second pro-lifer, Dick Schafer, 80, was knocked out cold in the same attack.

Local pro-life advocate John Roswell told LifeSiteNews at the time that Crosby’s “plate bone in his upper right cheek is completely fractured” and that he “is bleeding from some unidentified area behind his eye, and the bone eye orbit is completely shattered and will have to be replaced with metal.”

Police told WJZ-TV that video of attack on Crosby "shows the suspect strike [the victim] in the face with a closed fist as [the victim] is on his back on the ground. The suspect is then observed standing up and with extreme force, kicks [the victim] directly in the face." You can view a video report here about the attack.

Soon police released surveillance images of the suspect as well as surveillance video of the brutal assault. In the summer of 2024, police arrested 27-year-old Patrick Brice in connection with the attack, WBAL-AM reported. The 6'5" Brice was indicted on charges of first-degree assault, second-degree assault, and assault on an elderly person 65 and over, according to the American Center for Law and Justice, which is representing the attack victims. ACLJ told Blaze News that the trial begins Wednesday.

65-year-old pro-life advocate saying rosary outside Planned Parenthood gets decked with punch to the face — by a male support person for abortion provider, who wallops elderly pro-lifer a second time


A 65-year-old pro-life advocate who was saying the rosary in October 2018 outside a Planned Parenthood in Florida was hospitalized after a man who had apparently accompanied a patient to the clinic came outside and decked him with a punch before delivering another blow.

A male exited the Planned Parenthood building and crossed the street to take photos of the group of about 10 protesters, Carol Gentile, one of the regular protesters, told the Naples News.

The male then approached Joe Alger — who was saying the rosary — and got close to the 65-year-old's face and knocked him to the ground with a punch, Gentile added to the News, noting that the attacker followed that with a second punch.

Other witnesses corroborated Gentile's account, the paper said, and noted that the attacker used obscene language and gestures. A sheriff's deputy later escorted a man fitting witnesses’ description of the attacker from the North Naples clinic into the back seat of a patrol car, the News reported, adding that he wasn't in handcuffs and there were no arrests.

Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Sarah Scully told the News that "a fight broke out between a trespassed protester and a patient’s support person." Paul Van Valkenburg, a volunteer escort with Planned Parenthood, added to the paper that the punching victim earlier had trespassed on Planned Parenthood property and the sheriff’s office was initially called — and then called a second time in response to the attack.

Grand jury refuses to indict 32-year-old female charged with assaulting 82-year-old pro-life woman outside abortion clinic; Black Lives Matter accuses victim — whose leg was broken and required surgery — of 'violence ... in the name of Christianity'


A grand jury refused to indict a female charged with assaulting an 82-year-old pro-life woman outside Kentucky's only remaining abortion clinic, the Courier Journal said in a June 2019 report.

Janaya Alyce Gregory, 32, was charged with second-degree felony assault after surveillance video showed her approaching Donna Durning outside EMW Women's Surgical Center on April 12 and allegedly pushing her to the sidewalk. Durning was hospitalized with a broken leg that required surgery and rehabilitation. You can view surveillance video here of the incident.

Durning told the paper that "she just absolutely glared at me. She grabbed me by both of my shoulders and ... pitched me across the sidewalk. I landed on my left side and my left arm and my head."

Gregory pleaded not guilty and was released on her own recognizance, the Courier Journal said. Following the grand jury's decision, Black Lives Matter Louisville issued a Facebook post accusing During of "violence ... in the name of Christianity" toward those "seeking services for their reproductive health."

Pierced-out shaggy creep actually kicks pro-life woman recording video of him at silent protest


A pierced-out, shaggy male was caught on video kicking a pro-life woman during a silent protest on a Toronto street corner on Sept. 30, 2018, before running away when authorities were contacted, the victim wrote in an account for LifeSite.

Marie-Claire Bissonnette, a youth coordinator for Campaign Life Coalition in Toronto, said she began recording her attacker on her cell phone after he committed acts of vandalism against other pro-life advocates. You can view video here of the incident.

Jordan Hunt, 26, soon surrendered to police. He faced eight counts of assault and seven counts of mischief under $5,000, the Toronto Sun reported. Hunt also was charged with one count of assault in connection with an incident that occurred a month earlier, the paper said, but Constable David Hopkinson couldn't confirm whether it was related to a second video that surfaced showing a shirtless male harassing anti-abortion protesters. The male in that second video said, “Yeah, I tried to knock your stupid billboard to the side" and “if you don’t want me to f**k with your stuff, why are you trying to f**k with other people’s choices?"

Also, a Toronto hair salon fired Hunt and identified him as the attacker in the Sept. 30 video. “It has been brought to our attention that Jordan Hunt has been caught on camera assaulting an innocent bystander at a pro-life rally. We don’t condone his actions, and he has been let go,” Noble Studio 101 noted in an Instagram post. “We believe that everyone has a right to an opinion and the right to voice their opinion without fear of physical violence.”

Hunt was given eight months’ probation and a conditional discharge ordering him to stay 100 meters from any pro-life demonstration, not contact his victims, and attend counseling, according to a June 2019 Live Action report.

'Oh, are you crying, little girl?' Thuggish female physically attacks pro-life advocate — and the ill-advised outburst comes back to haunt suspect


Just one day after a shaggy male kicked a pro-life woman at a silent protest in Toronto — as described in the above story — another pro-life woman was physically attacked in the city.

Those who recorded video of the attack told Global News that it occurred near Ryerson University on Oct. 1, 2018. The attacker first knocked down signs, then shoved pro-life activist Katie Somers, Global News said, before apparently reaching into Somers’ backpack, pulling out an object, and smashing it on the ground.

The shoving continued, with the attacker doing a threatening "chest pound" as a crying Somers tried to get away. "C'mon, let's do it!" the attacker was heard saying. No one appeared to make any meaningful attempt to intervene, but a presumably pro-abortion woman could be heard on video mocking Somers: "Oh, are you crying, little girl? Did we hurt your feelings? I think we hurt her feelings."

The following year, Gabriela Skwarko, 23, admitted she was responsible for the attack and pleaded guilty, Global News reported in a separate story. The Crown and defense counsel recommended that Skwarko receive a conditional discharge and 18 months’ probation, and the judge said he would accept the recommendation, the outlet said, adding that Skwarko was suspended from Ryerson for one year and lost her job with the university.

'Burn, little Jesus freaks! Burn, burn, burn!' Anti-abortion group gets chilling death threats on voicemail after Molotov cocktail attack


A Wisconsin anti-abortion group received a series of chilling death threats on voicemail after a Molotov cocktail attack damaged its headquarters in May 2022. One of the messages came from a sinister character who sang "Burn, little Jesus freaks! Burn, burn, burn!"

Wisconsin Family Action was targeted after a Supreme Court decision draft overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked May 2. First came the Molotov cocktail attack, which resulted in fire damage; also a spray-painted message outside the offices read, “If abortions aren’t safe, then you aren’t, either."

Later death threats and other vile messages were left on WFA voicemail, CBN News reported. One male left a message saying that "you’re all going to burn … you’re following the f**king devil" and that “I hope you all burn ... that’s what you deserve.” Another male declared that “whoever set that fire is a true American patriot. You people are just utter filth of the planet. And it’s too bad your whore mothers didn’t abort each and every last one of you. Hopefully, you all get cancer ...”

Another guy sadistically sang, “Burn, little Jesus freaks! Burn, burn, burn!”

'Hail Satan!' Spitting, twerking, violent pro-abortion mob descends upon pro-life group at college


In late September 2019, TFP Student Action set up a small demonstration with brochures and bagpipes at George Washington University in the nation's capital, and things soon got dicey.

TFP Student Action said pro-abortion advocates soon employed social media to organize like-minded folks to gather and confront its members, who were quickly and vastly outnumbered.

"Hail Satan!" one counter-demonstrator yelled, the pro-life group said, while a male student offered, "I eat baby lungs for breakfast!" Perhaps the most disturbing moment took place when an angry woman spit on a pro-lifer. What's more, one TFP volunteer said he was kicked in the back of the leg, while another said students repeatedly hit his arm cast. At one point, the crowd converged around TFP Student Action, dancing and singing and flipping off the pro-life group.

You can see all the action on this video.

Muscular activist waving transgender flag slams into pro-life student marchers in front of cops; fails to get away unscathed


A noticeably muscular individual was caught on video waving a large transgender flag while running into students participating in the Virginia March for Life in February 2024. What's more, video of the violent act shows police officers observing the whole thing.

The culprit — who wore a maroon camisole along with a light red bandana that covered the individual's dark hair pulled back into a bun — was seen on the clip bounding through the middle of the march and purposely running into students, knocking them off balance, and ripping at one of their flags.

A later video shows authorities walking the march disrupter down a sidewalk in handcuffs. The New York Post reported that a 42-year-old transgender activist was arrested. The paper, citing Capitol Police, said Noah Cleveland was charged with one count of disorderly conduct.

Female who freaked out at pro-life advocates — and allegedly punched one who was recording video — is charged with assault


A female who freaked out at pro-life activists in front of an Alabama abortion clinic in May 2019 and allegedly punched one of them who was recording her was soon arrested.

Huntsville Police told Blaze News that Elizabeth Underwood, 28, turned herself in and was charged with third-degree assault. She was released on $1,000 bond, police said.

Mary Baggett, a sidewalk counselor, told Live Action she was recording video May 3 as she spoke to other pro-life activists in front of the Alabama Women's Center in Huntsville. Soon motorists appeared to argue with the pro-life activists, and one driver — a woman — emerged from her vehicle and began walking toward the pro-life activists.

"The woman who came up to me punched my hands. I must have been holding the camera with both hands, 'cause one is bruised pretty bad, but the one hand I hold the phone with is hurting, too," Baggett told Live Action. "Then she grabbed my phone and ran to her car. I went after her and demanded she give me the phone back, [and she] finally threw it in the grass."

Pro-life advocates physically attacked outside yet another Planned Parenthood; police allegedly refused to press charges


According to the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, two Washington, D.C.-area pro-life advocates — Terrisa Bukovinac, founder and executive director of PAAU, and Michael Gribbin — were assaulted in July 2023 outside the D.C. Planned Parenthood.

Bukovinac said the incident began when a female approached her and threw coffee in her face and hair, adding that when Gribbin tried to grab the female's coffee cup, her male partner assaulted him. Video shows the male throwing Gribbin to the street surface and repeatedly punching him; it also shows the female slapping Bukovinac in the face.

The PAAU said that despite video of the assault, D.C. police have refused to press charges.

"Even as a progressive anti-abortion atheist, I understand that the abortion industrial complex is responsible for a mass genocide which will require immense bravery to dismantle," Bukovinac said. "Pro-lifers must be committed to total nonviolence to effectively challenge the institution of legal child-killing around the globe."

The Daily Caller News Foundation, as part of its report, said D.C. police didn't immediately respond to its request for comment on the matter.

Female assaults pro-lifer, vandalizes anti-abortion displays — then later laughs, brags to police while holding infant on her lap that she was called a 'hero'


A female was caught on video in April 2019 assaulting a pro-life activist and vandalizing anti-abortion displays on the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Madison — and then later sat in an interview with police with a baby on her lap and bragged that others "said that I'm a hero" for her premeditated actions.

Campus police told Blaze News that Sasha Timofeeva was cited for vandalism and disorderly conduct stemming from the incident. Pro-life group Created Equal said the attack was against one of their members.

"You just tried to grab my f**king spray-paint," Timofeeva tells the pro-life activist in the video. "Are you going to tell the police that?"

"Because you're spray-painting our property," the activist replies. "Yeah, I'm going to tell them."

Timofeeva was seen in another clip later that day with police while holding a baby in her lap and laughing and bragging that someone called her a "hero" during the incident. The officer, while noting that he "could take [her] to jail for this," tells Timofeeva he's issuing misdemeanor charges against her and that she'll need to appear in court. Court records show Timofeeva was found guilty of assaultive behavior stemming from the incident.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News original: Pro-lifers dunk on New York Times for falsely accusing Trump of lying about Dems' abortion ambitions



The New York Times has demonstrated on numerous occasions a willingness to bend or abandon the truth, especially when doing so might further leftists' political agendas.

The paper rushed, for instance, to print Hamas propaganda in October 2023, falsely suggesting that the Islamic Jihad rocket misfire that blew up a hospital in Gaza, killing hundreds, was actually an Israeli airstrike. The paper also did its apparent best last year to furnish Democrats with the misleading narrative they needed to launch attacks on conservative Supreme Court justices — reliant upon claims that even the Washington Post knew weren't worth a jot of ink. When President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Jan. 20, setting the stage for mass-murdering Mexican cartels to be designated foreign terrorist organizations, the Times undermined its credibility again, suggesting that identifying and holding terrorists responsible for their actions might hurt the economy.

This is far from an exhaustive list. In fact, the Times — a paper compromised by the CIA during the Cold War — recently misled readers on another issue, claiming that President Donald Trump had misrepresented Democrats' aims regarding abortion.

Pro-life groups were quick to hammer the Times over its latest publication of fake news and its corresponding attempt to obfuscate a damning truth.

'The Times has an obligation to report this evidence.'

In a letter shared with Blaze News, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser told the executive and political editors of the New York Times that "while abortion remains an issue that evokes strong opinions, feelings, and reactions, such personal perceptions cannot overtake journalists' obligation to report fairly, accurately, and impartially."

Highlighting information the Times apparently decided to gloss over, Dannenfelser noted that "the Times has an obligation to report this evidence, cite the facts, and allow readers to come to their own conclusion without the interference of bias, omission, or misinformation that has often characterized your coverage of the issue."

'Debating any limitations around a federal right to abortion does not sit well with some key members of the Democratic Party.'

Among the articles Dannenfelser raised concern about was Times health policy writer Sheryl Gay Stolberg's Jan. 24 article, in which Stolberg stated that Trump "repeated false claims about abortion rights" in his video address to pro-life advocates at the 52nd March for Life, singling out his suggestion that Democrats are pushing "for a federal right to unlimited abortion on demand up to the moment of birth and even after birth."

Of course, to accept that Trump's assertion is false would mean discounting what Democrats have said and how they have voted in recent days and years.

NBC News, which Stolberg would apparently have readers believe was dealing in Trumpian falsehoods, noted in 2023 that some Democrats "insist on a sweeping national standard that goes beyond the one set by Roe v. Wade, which gave women the right to have an abortion before a fetus is considered viable and allowed states to set limitations for abortions after that time frame."

The same report noted that the "notion of debating any limitations around a federal right to abortion does not sit well with some key members of the Democratic Party, particularly reproductive rights advocates."

Multiple Democratic lawmakers have voted repeatedly to advance the so-called Women's Health Protection Act, which would codify a federal right to abortion with virtually no limitations or requirements, enabling health care providers, including incentivized abortionists, to end a child's life after fetal viability on the basis of a "good-faith medical judgment" that the continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the mother's health.

National Review previously noted that the WHPA's chief sponsor in the Senate admitted that the bill "doesn't distinguish" between physical and mental health and that the legislation advises courts to "liberally construe" the provisions of the act. A risk to a mother's emotional state of mind could, therefore, potentially qualify as a risk to the mother's "health."

When asked whether he supports any limits on abortion, Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, one of the many Democratic lawmakers who championed the WHPA, responded, "I don't believe so, no."

Such legislation would put the nation on a path to emulating at least eight Democratic states plus Washington, D.C., where there are no restrictions on third-trimester abortions.

Per Trump's suggestion, Democrats similarly want to minimize protections for babies who initially survive abortionists' attempted executions.

'Double standards and a slant that consistently favors one political party erode whatever remains of the public's confidence.'

When the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act went to a vote on Jan. 23, a total of 210 House Democrats voted against requiring health care practitioners to save babies who survive attempted abortions. Senate Democrats kept the sister bill from advancing a day earlier.

This is how the New York Times characterized the Democrat lawmakers' efforts to deprive abortion survivors of protection: "Senate Democrats blocked a Republican-written bill on Wednesday that could subject some doctors who perform abortions to criminal penalties, thwarting the G.O.P.'s first attempt to restrict reproductive rights since the party has secured its governing trifecta."

"The facts are in President Trump's favor," Dannenfelser said in her letter. "Democrats have not been shy about also publicly stating their support for abortion at any stage and without limits. A long list of Democrats, ranging from Senators John Fetterman, Mark Kelly, and Patty Murray, to Governor Katie Hobbs and former Governor Ralph Northam have refused to name a point before birth at which they think abortion should be limited."

"It's clear to us and to many other readers that the Times isn't just reporting on a debate but taking a side, placing its thumb on the scale in favor of the pro-abortion argument," continued the pro-life advocate. "As editors, you know well that these intentional word choices matter. The facts matter. Truth matters. Double standards and a slant that consistently favors one political party erode whatever remains of the public's confidence in legacy news publications."

Blaze News reached out to Stolberg, asking her to clarify what precisely Trump had said in the above quote that was false. The Times reporter did not respond by deadline.

The conservative nonprofit CatholicVote was among the other groups and pro-life advocates that blasted the Times for its "false reporting," stating, "Uh, @nytimes, Democrats literally just voted against giving medical care to babies who survive botched abortions and can't name a single abortion limit they support."

Tim Graham, executive editor of MRC's NewsBusters, stated, "America's most prestigious newspapers routinely paint pro-lifers as extreme. They can't seem to locate themselves on the opposite extreme. Is it because they consider themselves the moral center? Extending the 'right to choose' to terminate babies ... born alive may seem logical to them. But it defines a radical fringe."

The apparent eagerness on the part of fellow travelers to mislead on Democrats' real objectives regarding abortion might be informed by polling showing that only a minority of Americans think abortion should be legal in all cases.

A 2024 Pew Research poll found that only 25% of Americans support the legality of abortion in all cases. A May 2024 Gallup poll found that 50% of respondents supported legal abortion, but only under certain circumstances. A previous Gallup poll found that only 22% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in the third trimester.

A Knights of Columbus-Marist poll revealed on Jan. 23 that 67% of Americans — including 55% of respondents who identified as "pro-choice" — said that limits should be placed on when abortion is allowed.

Emma Camp, an assistant editor at Reason, recently noted in the Atlantic, "The grim reality of later abortion is simply too much for most Americans to countenance — and reasonable policymakers should listen to them."

"Most Americans believe that third-trimester abortions should be restricted. If Democrats want a platform that truly reflects majority opinion, they should address the question of what to do about later abortions and adopt a position that protects abortions in the first trimester while limiting second- and third-trimester abortions to pregnancies with fetal abnormalities or maternal health crises," added Camp.

Democrats don't, however, appear keen to heed the concerns of Americans. Unwilling to abandon the promise of limitless abortion, they must rely on the media to gaslight the public about what they are really up to. Stolberg appeared more than willing to do her part.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump Signs New Pair Of Executive Orders Limiting Taxpayer-Funded Abortions Both At Home And Abroad

'embedding forced taxpayer funding of elective abortions'

House Dems almost unanimously vote against bill protecting babies who survive abortion



The House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Thursday despite Democrats overwhelmingly voting against the legislation.

The bill would require health care practitioners to save babies who survive attempted abortions, arguing that if a baby is born, the infant "is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States" and is entitled to life. The bill also details that any health care practitioner who intentionally kills an infant who survives an abortion is subject to penalties, although the mother of the infant cannot be prosecuted.

'House and Senate Republicans are committed to protecting innocent life because we know every single person is made in the image of God and has inestimable dignity and value.'

The bill passed with all Republicans and one Democrat voting in favor of the legislation. Ultimately, 210 Democrats voted no on the bill.

"I am so grateful the House passed my vital legislation to ensure babies who survive an abortion are afforded lifesaving medical care. Innocent children deserve the opportunity to live and thrive — period," Republican Rep. Ann Wagner of Missouri said in a Thursday press release.

"It’s up to us to be the voice for these babies who are at their most vulnerable and ensure they get the love and care they need," Wagner added. "This should not be a controversial issue, but rest assured we will keep up the fight in Congress to make sure all babies, born and unborn, are treated like the miracles of life we know they are.”

The bill's passage came just a day after Senate Democrats kept the sister bill from advancing. The legislation also passed the House on the eve of the annual March for Life, the largest pro-life demonstration in the country.

"Yesterday, the House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said in a statement Friday. "Just one Democrat joined us. House and Senate Republicans are committed to protecting innocent life because we know every single person is made in the image of God and has inestimable dignity and value."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!