fbpx
Alabama votes to ban nearly all abortions including in rape and incest cases

Alabama votes to ban nearly all abortions including in rape and incest cases

ALABAMA lawmakers last night passed a near-total ban on abortions – including in cases of rape and incest – while threatening to jail doctors who carry them out for LIFE. State governor…

State governor Kay Ivey, a Republican, will make the final decision on whether to enact the controversial law after local senators voted in favour by 25 to six.

If it’s signed off, the new law will make it a felony for a doctor to perform an abortion at any stage of pregnancy – punishable by up to 99 years in jail.

The only exception would be when the woman’s health is at serious risk.

The historic legislation is designed to go against the US Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalised abortion nationally.

This means it will likely be challenged in the courts – but if backed by the current conservative-led US Supreme court, could see abortions banned across America.

NO EXCEPTION FOR RAPE AND INCEST

Senators in the Republican-led chamber rejected an attempt to add an exception for rape and incest – even of underage children – at the vote in Montgomery, Alabama, on Tuesday.

Democratic Sen. Bobby Singleton said after the amendment was rejected: “You don’t care anything about babies having babies in this state, being raped and incest.

“You just aborted the state of Alabama with your rhetoric with this bill.”

COULD GO NATIONWIDE

The bill’s sponsor, Republican Terri Collins, said she expects Gov Ivey to sign the ban into law.

Ivey has not publicly commented on what she’ll do – but the large margin in favour of the bill means any veto she might bring in to block it could be easily overturned.

Republican Sen. Clyde Chambliss said in a statement after the bill’s passage: “Roe v. Wade has ended the lives of millions of children.

“While we cannot undo the damage that decades of legal precedence under Roe have caused, this bill has the opportunity to save the lives of millions of unborn children.”

Abortion opponents in several states are currently seeking to challenge access to the procedure.

Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio and Georgia have approved bans on abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected – which can occur in about the sixth week of pregnancy.

The Alabama bill goes further by seeking to outlaw abortion entirely.

Continue reading here:

Source: Alabama votes to ban nearly all abortions including in rape and incest cases

Elizabeth Warren Turns Down Fox News Town Hall, Calling the Network a ‘Hate-for-Profit Racket’

Elizabeth Warren Turns Down Fox News Town Hall, Calling the Network a ‘Hate-for-Profit Racket’

The Democratic candidate said that she does not want to encourage additional ad dollars for the network.

Is this the leadership we want in America? Just because a network has a different perspective than her she said they are racist and full of bigotry. CNN and MSNBC are full of hate every day. Vote DEM Out.

“I love town halls. I’ve done more than 70 since January, and I’m glad to have a television audience be a part of them. Fox News has invited me to do a town hall, but I’m turning them down—here’s why,” she wrote Tuesday morning in a series of tweets. “Fox News is a hate-for-profit racket that gives a megaphone to racists and conspiracists—it’s designed to turn us against each other, risking life & death consequences, to provide cover for the corruption that’s rotting our government and hollowing out our middle class.”

Warren charged that the network “balances a mix of bigotry, racism, and outright lies with enough legit journalism to make the claim to advertisers that it’s a reputable news outlet.” She said that participation in a town hall on the network sends a signal that it is appropriate to still buy ads on the cable channel, which hosts a primetime lineup of overtly pro-Trump hosts who engage in bigoted and conspiratorial rhetoric—something she doesn’t want to encourage.

Read the full article here:

Source: Elizabeth Warren Turns Down Fox News Town Hall, Calling the Network a ‘Hate-for-Profit Racket’

Barr Assigns U.S. Attorney in Connecticut to Review Origins of Russia Inquiry

Barr Assigns U.S. Attorney in Connecticut to Review Origins of Russia Inquiry

 

WASHINGTON — Attorney General William P. Barr has assigned the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut to examine the origins of the Russia investigation, according to two people familiar with the matter, a move that President Trump has long called for but that could anger law enforcement officials who insist that scrutiny of the Trump campaign was lawful.

John H. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, has a history of serving as a special prosecutor investigating potential wrongdoing among national security officials, including the F.B.I.’s ties to a crime boss in Boston and accusations of C.I.A. abuses of detainees.

His inquiry is the third known investigation focused on the opening of an F.B.I. counterintelligence investigation during the 2016 presidential campaign into possible ties between Russia’s election interference and Trump associates.

The department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is separately examining investigators’ use of wiretap applications and informants and whether any political bias against Mr. Trump influenced investigative decisions. And John W. Huber, the United States attorney in Utah, has been reviewing aspects of the Russia investigation. His findings have not been announced.

Additionally on Capitol Hill, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said he, too, intends to review aspects of law enforcement’s work in the coming months. And Republicans conducted their own inquiries when they controlled the House, including publicizing details of the F.B.I.’s wiretap use.

Read the rest of the article here:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/barr-assigns-us-attorney-in-connecticut-to-review-origins-of-russia-inquiry/ar-AABjF9U

U.S. Says Iran Likely Behind Ship Attacks

U.S. Says Iran Likely Behind Ship Attacks

An initial U.S. assessment indicated Iran likely was behind the attack on two Saudi Arabian oil tankers and two other vessels damaged over the weekend near the Strait of Hormuz, a U.S. official said, a finding that, if confirmed, would further inflame military tensions in the Persian Gulf.

An initial U.S. assessment indicated Iran likely was behind the attack on two Saudi Arabian oil tankers and two other vessels damaged over the weekend near the Strait of Hormuz, a U.S. official said, a finding that, if confirmed, would further inflame military tensions in the Persian Gulf.

The assessment, while not conclusive, was the first suggestion by any nation that Iran was responsible for the attack and comes after a series of U.S. warnings against aggression by Iran or its allies and proxies against military or commercial vessels in the region.

The U.S. official, who declined to be identified, didn’t offer details about what led to the assessment or its implications for a possible U.S. response. The U.S. has said in the past week that it was sending an aircraft carrier, an amphibious assault ship, a bomber task force and an antimissile system to the region after it alleged intelligence showed Iran posed a threat to its troops.

“If they do anything, they will suffer greatly. We’ll see what happens with Iran,” President Trump said while meeting with Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban at the White House earlier on Monday.

Iran’s office at the United Nations didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Read the rest of the article here:

Source: U.S. Says Iran Likely Behind Ship Attacks

Apps cost too much? Court allows suit adding to Apple’s woes

Apps cost too much? Court allows suit adding to Apple’s woes

WASHINGTON (AP) — Consumers can pursue a lawsuit complaining that iPhone apps cost too much, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday, adding to Apple’s woes that already include falling iPhone sales and a European investigation.

The lawsuit could have major implications for the tech giant’s handling of the more than 2 million apps in Apple’s App Store, where users get much of the software for their smartphones. While most of those apps are free to download, some impose fees for people to use the software and subscribe to the services.

In those cases, Apple charges a commission of 30%, a practice that the lawsuit contends unfairly drives up the price for the apps. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion that agreed the antitrust lawsuit can move forward in a lower court.

The court’s four liberal justices joined Kavanaugh, one of President Donald Trump’s two high court appointees, to reject a plea from Apple to end the lawsuit at this early stage. The decision did not involve the merits of the suit.

Continue reading the article here:

Source: Apps cost too much? Court allows suit adding to Apple’s woes

0