Connect with us

News

‘I’m Done Here Peter’: Jean-Pierre Explains First Amendment After Doocy Asks ‘Justices Have No Right to Privacy?’

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was forced to explain to Fox News propagandist Peter Doocy Americans have a First Amendment constitutional right to protest, as he ironically attempted to get her to say the Biden administration believes Supreme Court Justices have no right to privacy.

Doocy repeatedly pressed Jean-Pierre about pro-choice activists who protested Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh Thursday night outside a high-end D.C. steakhouse owned by a billionaire GOP donor. Kavanaugh left Morton’s steakhouse through a back entrance and reportedly opted to exit before dessert.

There are no reports indicating anyone was arrested, and no reports of damage or violence. Yet Doocy framed his questioning to accuse the activists of intimidating Kavanaugh, despite them having the legal right to peacefully protest.

It’s unclear why Doocy would even bring up the issue to the White House, which has nothing to do with the protestors who were focused on an entirely separate branch of the federal government.

Yet Jean-Pierre responded, telling him, “We have been pretty clear on this, the president has been very clear that we condemn any intimidation of judges in this specific question here.” Jean-Pierre said. President Biden “has signed a piece of legislation making sure that they have the protection that they need.”

“But he never said, ‘Don’t go to their houses,’” Doocy pressed. “as long as they’re peaceful. Would you say, ‘Don’t go to a restaurant that a Supreme Court justice is at?’”

Jean-Pierre continued to focus on the “intimidation” part of Doocy’s question.

Doocy appeared stunned that the White House was not opposed to activists protesting outside a restaurant where a Supreme Court justice was dining, “as long as they’re what you consider ‘peaceful.'”

“So where’s the line, if these protestors can go to a justice’s house, they can go to a restaurant – where is it that you don’t think is appropriate?”

Jean-Pierre again reiterated peaceful protests are OK. “If it’s outside of a restaurant, if it’s peaceful.”

“Really?” Doocy, stunned, replied.

“So these justices, because protestors do not agree with an opinion they signed on to have no right to privacy?” he asked, wholly unaware of the irony of his question.

“I’m done here Peter,” Jean-Pierre concluded after more than three minutes of the back-and-forth Q&A.

The Supreme Court, in striking down Roe v. Wade last month, told America the Constitution offers its citizens no right to privacy – a right the Court found when it ruled on Roe in 1973.

Watch below or at this link:

 

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Mystery Grand Jury Witness in Trump Hush Money Probe Is Former ‘Enquirer’ Publisher and Trump Ally

Published

on

Avid followers of the Manhattan District Attorney’s moves noted the grand jury had been called into service for Monday, and soon news leaked that yet another witness would be testifying in the probe into Donald Trump’s alleged hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

Monday afternoon, NBC News’ Garrett Haake reported live on MSNBC that the mystery witness was David Pecker, the former tabloid publisher of the “National Enquirer,” who reportedly had been looking for stories in 2016 to protect Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Haake notes Monday was Pecker’s second appearance before the grand jury in the hush money case.

The New York Times also reported David Pecker as the grand jury witness, calling Pecker “a key player in the hush-money matter. He and the tabloid’s top editor helped broker the deal between the porn star, Stormy Daniels, and Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s fixer at the time.”

READ MORE: ‘Our Children Deserve Better’: First Lady Jill Biden Speaks Out After Six Die in Nashville School Mass Shooting

“While the focus of Mr. Pecker’s testimony is unclear, he could provide valuable information for prosecutors. A longtime ally of Mr. Trump, he agreed to keep an eye out for potentially damaging stories about Mr. Trump during the 2016 campaign,” The Times reports. “For a brief time in October 2016, Ms. Daniels appeared to have just that kind of story. Her agent and lawyer discussed the possibility of selling exclusive rights to her story of a sexual encounter with Mr. Trump to The National Enquirer, which would then promise to never publish it, a practice known as ‘catch and kill.'”

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman weighed in, noting, “nothing about that decision [to have Pecker testify] suggests any change of heart on Bragg’s part to indict Trump.”

Former Dept. of Defense Special Counsel Ryan Goodman, an NYU professor of law, notes that Pecker’s “testimony can show the [hush money] scheme was designed to affect outcome of election.”

“He reportedly communicated directly with Trump on payment,” Goodman adds.

Continue Reading

News

‘Our Children Deserve Better’: First Lady Jill Biden Speaks Out After Six Die in Nashville School Mass Shooting

Published

on

First Lady Dr. Jill Biden, speaking Monday afternoon at a National League of Cities conference, told attendees, “Our children deserve better,” as she broke the news of the Nashville school mass shooting at Covenant Presbyterian School where three children and three adults were shot dead.

“You know,” Dr. Biden, herself an educator and clearly pained by the news, began her remarks by saying, “I hate to say what I’m gonna say next because you know you’re so enthusiastic and with so much energy and hope and I feel it.”

“But while you’ve been in this room, I don’t know whether you’ve been on your phones but we just learned about another shooting in Tennessee, a school shooting and I am truly without words and our children deserve better, and we stand – all of us – we stand with Nashville in prayer.”

READ MORE: New WSJ Poll Is Devastating for DeSantis and His ‘Anti-Woke’ Policies

The First Lady, a former public high school English teacher and currently a professor of English at a community college, was speaking at the organization’s Congressional City Conference.

Watch Dr. Biden below or at this link.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Desperate to Keep Any Possible Criminal Evidence From Supreme Court: Legal Expert

Published

on

Donald Trump’s decision to allow one of his lawyers to speak before a grand jury on Friday morning, instead of appealing all the way to the Supreme Court, may have been made out of fear of what the justices on the nation’s highest court might see if they reviewed the case.

According to MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, under normal circumstances, the former president would have dragged out a legal fight over attorney-client privilege that would have kept attorney Evan Corcoran from testifying under oath about Trump’s possession of government documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort that led to the FBI showing up with a warrant.

As Rubin notes, the fact that Trump let Corcoran testify over three hours raised eyebrows.

“For one, yes, it is indeed unusual, if not unheard of, for a lawyer to be litigating against a party one day and then testifying under court-ordered examination by that same party the next one,” she wrote before suggesting Trump and his legal team were looking at the long game when he might need the predominantly conservative Supreme Court to lend him a helping hand.

RELATED: Revealed: Emails show how Trump lawyers drove Michael Cohen to turn on the president

Writing, “Trump has made clear he believes this Supreme Court — controlled by conservative justices, three of whom he appointed — owes him one,” she added, “My hunch is that Trump’s team let Corcoran’s testimony happen because of what’s likely involved in any request to pause, much less, review a crime-fraud-related ruling: the evidence.”

“Put another way, if Trump had petitioned the Supreme Court to stay Corcoran’s testimony and document production, the justices would have seen some, if not all, of what Judge Howell and the three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit have already reviewed: proof that Trump misled Corcoran and engaged in criminal conduct,” she elaborated.

Rubin went on to note that Trump would likely appeal any conviction to the Supreme Court, writing, “And for someone whose one last hope, if he is ultimately charged or tried by any of the multiple entities now investigating him, is that same Supreme Court, letting the justices see evidence of his alleged crimes now would be a bridge too far.”

“Trump can’t afford to lose the Supreme Court yet,” she suggested.

You can read more here.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.