On September 11, we detailed how Kamala Harris and the media were wrong, and former president Donald Trump was right, in assessing the exchange on abortion during the presidential debate. Their “fact-checking” is abysmal.
The media found fault with Trump for his claim that former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, and vice presidential candidate Tim Walz, find “execution after birth” to be acceptable. CBS, Reuters, the Washington Post and Politifact say this is not true.
As I said in my defense of Trump, what he said was “basically true.” In discussing Northam, I pointed out that “while the baby would not be ‘executed,’ per se, he could be put down, or left to die, after he was ‘kept comfortable.’” That is true.
Intentionally allowing a baby to die—it does not matter if the physician and the mother want that to happen—is to effectively kill the child. As governor of Minnesota, Walz revoked legislation that requires lifesaving care for newborns. In practice, this is a backhanded way of permitting infanticide.
Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com
Similarly, NBC, CNN, the Associated Press, ABC, NPR, Newsweek and the New York Times claim that Trump cannot be right because infanticide is illegal in every state; the latter two argue that “there is no such thing as abortion after birth.”
Infanticide may be proscribed in law, but as just pointed out, Northam and Walz allowed it to happen. Moreover, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo allowed premature babies who survive a chemical abortion to be denied treatment.
If a baby is born, it is proof that the baby was not aborted. But this skirts the issue. If a baby who survives a botched abortion is allowed to die, unattended by medical staff, the decision-makers are permitting infanticide, however indirectly it may be.
Some in the media are playing games with this issue. Factcheck and ctinsider note that abortions in the ninth month are “exceedingly rare.” But Trump never contested how frequent they are—he simply said that Harris and Walz defend late-term abortions. They do and it is dishonest to pretend otherwise.
USA Today tries to rescue Walz by saying Trump was wrong to say the vice presidential candidate “says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine.” It claims that “There is no evidence that Walz said this, though he signed a bill that removed limits to abortion based on gestational duration.” So who cares if Walz didn’t say he was “absolutely fine” with his decision? He indisputably favors no limits on abortion through term.
Poynter, which prizes itself on being the premier fact-checker, contends that when Northam said it was okay for a physician and the mother to decide not to resuscitate a baby who survived a late-term abortion, “Northam declined to say what that discussion would entail.” So what? It does not change the fact that they may decide not to treat the child, thus passively allowing infanticide to take place.
The media, in general, are so rabid in their defense of abortion rights that they are incapable of accurately reporting on this subject. Either that or they are lying in service to their cause.
LifeNews Note: Bill Donohue is the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.