With the Supreme Court set to hear a Mississippi case to challenge Roe V. Wade next session, CNN Prime Time host Chris “Fredo” Cuomo once again spit venom at those who were pro-life. He flaunted his ignorance of the pro-life movement as he suggested they didn’t understand science while also being pro-racism and akin to Jim Crow. And like a dunce, he claimed it was the Fourth Amendment that addressed the right to privacy.
Teasing his “BOLO” segment ahead of a commercial break, Fredo put on a serious tone as he warned viewers of Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s betrayal of women and “reproductive rights”:
The first major test of a woman's right, her liberty, controlling what happens to her body, since Trump got his third and final justice on the Supreme Court, has been set. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, her place on the bench as an outspoken advocate against reproductive rights. The next battle in the evolution of Roe V. Wade is upon us.
After the break, he knocked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the “6-3 decidedly conservative court.” Vilifying the conservative justices, he claimed “the Supreme Court of the United States that it will hear a case that could remove a woman's right to control their own body.”
Despite saying that the law banned abortions after 15 weeks, he lambasted pro-lifers who “get up in their religion and righteousness” and claimed they didn’t know that the science was on their side in terms of early viability:
Though, medical capabilities may be moving the point of viability well short of where it was assumed to be in 1973 with Roe V. Wade. So, you’d think some of the proponents of harsher measures would want the science involved.
Fredo went on to suggest that pro-lifers really didn’t care about their cause because it was “a political lever to use a distraction from policy and solving problems.”
In reality, pro-lifers knew that abortion was a deadly problem for society and they knew that the science supported their position. It was the left that didn’t what to know what the science said.
Proving that the radical liberal position was ‘anything that I don’t like is racism and Jim Crow,’ Cuomo suggested that was what the pro-life movement was about:
But again, it’s not about science or consensus. It’s about dividing lines, legislating to the far-right white-fright vote. Flooding the zone with 536 bills that abridge a woman's right to control her own body in 46 states. It’s just like voting rights in one way. You see?
What Fredo refused to admit was that it was Planned Parent that had its roots in racism and bigotry, with founder Margaret Sanger targeting black communities with her eugenics organization.
“But your history book may not have mentioned the darker side of Sanger, like her views on eugenics, a discredited belief in improving the human race through selective breeding. Eugenics practices targeted the disabled, people of color, and poor people,” CNN reported last year.
And to this day, Planned Parenthood deliberately targeted minority communities.
“It seems like the far-right only cares about protecting humans before they are born,” he callously sneered. Of course, he didn’t want his viewers to know that pro-lifers also supported organizations that took care of mothers who chose not to abort (this author’s family does just that).
And as he was wrapping up his “BOLO,” Cuomo again lashed out the lone conservative woman on the bench:
And now we have a much more conservative group of judges. One of whom, Justice Amy Coney Barrett is an out-spoken opponent of any reproductive right in this regard. And if anyone is going to say, “no, she’s never said anything that bad.” She belongs to a group that was all about it.
This was far from the first time Fredo had bashed pro-lifers, in 2018 he lectured conservatives on what it meant to be pro-life. Meanwhile, he tried to pass himself off as a devout Catholic while promoting his brother’s grotesque abortion law in New York.
Chris “Fredo” Cuomo’s bashing and smears of pro-lifers was made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from AT&T and Liberty Mutual. Their contact information is linked so you can tell them about the biased news they’re funding.
The transcript is below, click "expand" to read:
CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time
May 17, 2021
9:48:21 p.m. EasternCHRIS CUOMO: I got another BOLO for you. The first major test of a woman's right, her liberty, controlling what happens to her body, since Trump got his third and final justice on the Supreme Court, has been set. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, her place on the bench as an outspoken advocate against reproductive rights. The next battle in the evolution of Roe V. Wade is upon us. I'll tell you about it next.
(…)
9:52:46 p.m. Eastern
CUOMO: Here’s a BOLO, be on the lookout. We’re about to see if Mitch McConnell’s Supreme Court mission pays off. It’s now a 6-3 decidedly conservative court. And it now says – the Supreme Court of the United States that it will hear a case that could remove a woman's right to control their own body.
Dobbs V. Jackson Mississippi Women’s Health Organization. It tests a state law that bans almost all efforts to end a pregnancy after 15 weeks including pregnancies resulting from incense or rape.
Legally, the issue was fetal viability. When does what is inside a woman become a person with rights under the law. You would think we would’ve a panel of experts on a special commission by now to see what the science says. Right? But, we don't seem to have the intellectual curiosity about this issue.
Because it’s not really about science. It has become a culture war. It’s a political lever to use a distraction from policy and solving problems. To allow people to get up in their religion and righteousness over any sense of what science suggests.
Though, medical capabilities may be moving the point of viability well short of where it was assumed to be in 1973 with Roe V. Wade. So, you’d think some of the proponents of harsher measures would want the science involved.
Most Americans want the court to uphold Roe V. Wade, which found women had liberty over their own body as a right to privacy – a privacy right under the 14th amendment. 62 uphold, 24 overturn.
But again, it’s not about science or consensus. It’s about dividing lines, legislating to the far-right white-fright vote. Flooding the zone with 536 bills that abridge a woman's right to control her own body in 46 states. It’s just like voting rights in one way. You see? It seems like the far-right only cares about protecting humans before they are born.
But the legal issues are much closer than the politics on this. 1973, Roe was a 7-2 decision. Reading Rehnquist’s decent is actually worth your time. Especially given that this Dobbs case is coming. Especially, also because, you know, Roe is not invilet. Yes, it’s stare decisis, but that is subjected to when they decide to overturn. It was partially overturned in the 90s – 1992, I believe in the Casey case.
And now we have a much more conservative group of judges. One of whom, Justice Amy Coney Barrett is an out spoken opponent of any reproductive right in this regard. And if anyone is going to say, “no, she’s never said anything that bad.” She belongs to a group that was all about it.
So, we’re about to see the fruits of McConnell connivance. Will it come true with the crown jewel of the culture wars. BOLO. We’ll be right back.
