AOC Goes After Kavanaugh’s Character Because She Can’t Go After The Possible Ruling

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is off her rocker, and nobody is listening. When she realizes that nobody is listening, she starts sensationalizing her view even more, and she crosses the line in many scenarios. Just look at the Met Gala where she accepted tens of thousands of dollars in tickets and wore her “Tax the Rich” dress. Too far to prove a point that was lost from the beginning. The wealthiest people in America were there, and they didn’t want to pay more in taxes.

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh survived a false allegation of lewd misconduct while in college, but that isn’t enough. AOC has been blasting Kavanaugh because of an upcoming ruling on abortion. AOC wants to bring this up to encourage base voters to protest and complain enough to pressure the Supreme Court ruling possibly. That’s not how America works, but AOC doesn’t like the way America operated as is and would love to push forward her socialist agendas.

AOC says that Kavanaugh’s physical assault allegations haven’t been investigated yet. He’s still able to rule on abortion laws.

The criticism comes after Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves says that he’ll enforce a ban on abortion in his state if Roe v. Wade is overturned. The Constitution doesn’t specify the legality of abortions, and the Supreme Court knows that.

Kavanaugh asked Stewart, “As I understand it, you’re arguing that the Constitution is silent and neutral on the issue of abortion? The Constitution is neither pro-life nor pro-choice on abortion, but instead leaves the decision to the people of the states or perhaps Congress in the democratic process? Is that correct?”

“Right, Your Honor. We’re saying it’s up to the people,” Stewart said.

“And so, for the and presumably would continue to allow abortion, many states freely. Is it correct that some states would be able to do so even if you prevailed in your opinion?” Kavanaugh continued.

Stewart responded, “That’s consistent with our position, Your Honor. It gives interests a full voice, and many of the abortions we see in states that I don’t think anyone would expect to change their laws in a more restrictive direction.”

Justice John Roberts made a fine point about bodily autonomy pre-viability and post-viability and a woman’s right of “ingesting an illegal substance and causing harm to a pre-viability fetus.” It’s an issue that most haven’t considered in the pro-life or pro-choice argument that Julie Rikelman responded and said, “I would say that the states can certainly regulate throughout pregnancy, both before and after viability, to preserve fetal life and it preserve the woman’s health.”

Interesting that it can turn like that. The left won’t be thrilled that it was brought up.

The attack from AOC isn’t because of the Roe v. Wade argument but is attacking the character so that she can go after their credibility after the ruling.