By Dave Andrusko
As we’ve talked about for months at NRL News Today, the Media Elite did everything in its power to defeat pro-life Donald Trump. Their guttersnipe attacks have only intensified now–against all their confident assurances to the contrary–that the American electorate chose him to be our 45th President.
As the next phase of that strategy–embarrassingly, transparently obvious–is to attempt to dislodge the coalition that elected Trump by announcing that he is already reneging. With one exception: abortion and pro-lifers.
There the New York Times et al. take Trump at face value. After 60 Minutes aired a typically hostile Leslie Stahl interview yesterday, it would be impossible to argue Trump is attempting to distance himself from the strong pro-life views he espoused during the campaign.
That’s why you get this New York Times headline: “Donald Trump Appears to Soften Stance on Immigration, but Not on Abortion.” Here’s the first paragraph of Julie Hirschfeld Davis’ story.
WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump appeared to soften some of his hardest-line campaign positions on immigration on Sunday, but he also restated his pledge to roll back abortion rights and used Twitter to lash out at his critics, leaving open the possibility that he would continue using social media in the Oval Office and radically change the way presidents speak to Americans.
Before we go any further, think about the second half of that opening sentence. Donald Trump is “leaving open the possibility” that the social media avenue he drove down during the campaign will be an important part of his communications strategy.
Well, if the Establishment Media is already boiling him in oil, wouldn’t you think it would prudent for President-elect Trump to use alternative methods to “speak to Americans”?
What about “rolling back abortion rights”?
Lesley Stahl: One of the things you’re going to obviously get an opportunity to do, is name someone to the Supreme Court. And I assume you’ll do that quickly?
Donald Trump: Yes. Very important.
Lesley Stahl: During the campaign, you said that you would appoint justices who were against abortion rights. Will you appoint– are you looking to appoint a justice who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade?
Donald Trump: So look, here’s what’s going to happen– I’m going to– I’m pro-life. The judges will be pro-life. They’ll be very—
Lesley Stahl: But what about overturning this law–
Donald Trump: Well, there are a couple of things. They’ll be pro-life, they’ll be– in terms of the whole gun situation, we know the Second Amendment and everybody’s talking about the Second Amendment and they’re trying to dice it up and change it, they’re going to be very pro-Second Amendment. But having to do with abortion if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states. So it would go back to the states and–
Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but then some women won’t be able to get an abortion?
Donald Trump: No, it’ll go back to the states.
Lesley Stahl: By state—no some —
Donald Trump: Yeah.
Donald Trump: Yeah, well, they’ll perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.
Lesley Stahl: And that’s OK?
Donald Trump: Well, we’ll see what happens. It’s got a long way to go, just so you understand. That has a long, long way to go.
Two things. First, Trump reiterated yet again he will nominate pro-life justices to the Supreme Court. No backtracking, no hedging, no qualified answers.
Second, as NRLC has explained for decades, the Supreme Court nationalized abortion in 1973 in Roe v. Wade. If/when the justices do overturn Roe, which we fervently hope comes to pass, each state will decide its own abortion statutes. This is another reason why NRLC’s system of 50 state affiliates is so important: when Roe is history, we will fight the battle, state by state.
As a continuing part of our ongoing post-election coverage, we’ll be posting elsewhere today more about and from our benighted opposition.