Posted on 09/05/2021 11:42:00 AM PDT by LibertyWoman
Donald Trump wouldn't say whether he agrees with the Supreme Court ruling upholding a new Texas heartbeat law that bans abortion after six weeks – or when a fetal heartbeat can be detected.
...
When asked if he supported the new ruling, Trump dodged the question – instead taking credit for a series of conservative rulings due to his appointment of three Supreme Court justices during his four years in office.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Not good.
Just as bad as his refusal to name antifa a terrorist organization
I think he doesn’t like the snitching part of the bill
My first impression is that this is a DM hit piece, complete with sensationalized headline and selective quotes. I reserve judgment until I can hear the whole unedited interview in context.
I hope it is that; if it is though, why didn’t he just say that? Trump generally has no problem with speaking his mind/opinion.
His answer was fine.
Until the tro is lifted (or extended or the law for some reason is found unconstitutional) he shouldn’t take a position on it. As it stands no one can accuse him of saying he doesn’t support it because he never said that.
What he said was he was “studying it” which is a thoughtful response.
Good for Him. Second he supports it it becomes an even bigger lightning rod. In fact he should say he hates it just so they keep it.
One - it wasn’t a ruling. The SC voted not to take up an injunction of the rule before it was even enacted - before any local or state court had made a decision - before ANYONE HAD ACTUALLY BEEN AFFECTED which the SC NEVER takes up action on (except, of course in this case it’s controversial)
Two - it’s a gotcha question that has no upside and all downside if he answers - if he agrees with the law then it becomes a lightning rod of the Democrats who will happily destroy Texas to get their way. If he disagrees with the law then it still gains him no Democrat allies and galvanizes them anyway to say “Look, even your Orange god has abandoned you.”
Deflecting takes it off the table.
That said - I think Trump has always been pro-choice and he IS correct by pointing out that the only reason we got this ruling was because of his SC court pics.
Certainly not because of W’s.
Well that was in 1999. He did come out as pro life and if iirc, it was the birth of Barron that converted him (and probably seeing the insanity of the pro aborts as well)
I hadn’t thought about it that way. Thx
Trump never refused to do that.
There are only 2 choices..It’s murdering a baby or not..That’s it......
He may have. You only read what the media gave you.
Wait until he reads those covid vaccine contracts. Complex and not so temporary.
The left are still terrified of him.
I thought he did label Antifa as a terrorist group but the FBI and DOJ wouldn’t. Chris Wray just called it an ideology.
Having citizens enforcing laws that are at this time unconstitutional opens the door for leftards in other states to suppress our constitutional rights.
This stupid law will set the pro-life movement back decades, IMO.
Maybe Trump deep down wants to ban all abortions, with no six-week window. Who knows? (I’m just grasping at straws here.)
And remember, the Daily Mail isn’t exactly a fan of Trump anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.