Unhinged Democrat witness tells Congressional committee that men can get pregnant and have abortions


The following contains editorial content which is the opinion of the author, a current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.

WASHINGTON, DC- Liberalism is a mental disorder. That is the only way to explain a woman who testified before the House Judiciary Committee this past week who told members under oath that men can get pregnant and have abortions. Seriously.

Town Hall reports Aimee Arrambide, a radical leftist was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) if she believes men can get pregnant. Arrambide, executive director of a pro-baby killing group, Avow Texas, didn’t hesitate.

“Yes,” she replied after stating that everyone can “identify” for themselves.

She then testified—under oath—that it is possible for men to have abortions.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) then asked Arrambide to define the difference between two-year-old children, a baby which is an hour old, or a child that is “8 inches further up the birth canal.”

“I trust people to determine what to do with their own bodies—full stop,” she replied.

During a question and answer with another loony leftist, Dr. Yashica Robinson, an OB-GYN physician, Bishop asked her how she would define a woman. Apparently just as with Supreme Court Justice-to-be Ketanji Brown Jackson, Robinson isn’t a biologist either.

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns,” Bishop pronounced. “You’re a medical doctor—what is a woman?” he asked.

“The reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think its discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

Your basic non-answer.

Robinson repeatedly asserted that while she was a woman (although she couldn’t define exactly what that is), she said she always asks for a person’s preferred pronouns before assuming that a person with breasts and a vagina is in fact a woman, according to a Fox News Digital report.

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop pressed.

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns…I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you have me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop continued.

“Yes, I’m telling you I’m a woman,” Robinson replied.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson snarked back. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver,” Bishop replied, clearly irritated by Robinson evading the question.

Robinson also said she has no issues whatsoever with aborting a 20-week-old unborn child.

The hearing, called “Revoking your Rights” was called as Democrats continue to assert that a leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court, which would strike down Roe v. Wade, would restrict women’s access to murder their unborn children.

What that would do, however is return that responsibility to the states, which in many cases provide much more liberal rights to murder babies than Roe provides.


For a prior piece about Roe v. Wade, we invite you to:


The following includes editorial content which is the opinion of the author, a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today. 

WASHINGTON, DC- For all the bloviating Joe Biden did on Tuesday about the leak indicating the Supreme Court was likely going to overturn Roe v Wade and return abortion decisions to the states, forty years ago Biden himself voted for a constitutional amendment to do exactly that.

A draft opinion that violated hundreds of years of Supreme Court precedent after being leaked to the press has gotten leftists panties in a bunch, although most legal experts say the decision would likely have little overall impact on the baby killing industry.

All the decision would do is comply with federalism outlined in the Constitution and return those decisions to the states. It is believed that few states would completely outlaw the practice.

In a statement released to the press from the White House, ostensibly (but doubtfully) written by old Joe himself, he said:

“First my administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade. We said that Roe is based on “a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’…against government interference with intensely personal decisions.”

Interesting. Biden himself has no problem whatsoever violating that exact premise of “personal liberty…against government interference with intensely personal decisions” when it comes to forcing people to take an experimental vaccine. All a matter of politics, apparently.

Continuing, Biden made his second point:

“Second, shortly after the enactment of Texas law SB 8 and other laws restricting women’s reproductive rights,  I directed my Gender Policy Council and White House Counsel’s office to prepare options for an Administration response to the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. We will be ready when any ruling is issued.”

Joe apparently is unaware that as a co-equal branch of government, there is nothing the Executive branch can do other than to accept the ruling.

Finally, Biden said:

“Third, if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. [Unless it’s Ketanji Brown Jackson, she doesn’t know what a woman is]. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. [always about politics] At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”

Unfortunately for Biden, the internet is forever, as noted by David Harsanyi on Twitter:

“In 1982 Joe Biden proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn Roe v. Wade and allow states to choose their own policies on abortion.”

Twelve years later:

“In 1994, Biden wrote a letter to a constituent bragging that he has voted against abortion funding on 50 separate occasions.”


The Catholic League wrote:

Joe Biden entered the senate in 1973, the same year the Supreme Court legalized abortion in its Roe v. Wade decision. He has evolved from being strongly pro-life to rabidly pro-abortion. Here is a list of his changing positions.

1974: A year after Roe v. Wade was decided, he said the ruling had gone “too far” and that a woman seeking an abortion should not have the “sole right to say what should happen to her body.”

1976: He votes for the “Hyde Amendment” which bans federal funding of abortions.

1981: He introduces the “Biden Amendment” which prohibits foreign-aid funding of biomedical research involving abortion.

1982: He votes for a constitutional amendment allowing states to overturn Roe v. Wade.

1983: He votes against a constitutional amendment allowing states to overturn Roe v. Wade. [that’s correct, one year after voting for it]

1984: He votes for the Mexico City Policy which bans federal funding for abortions.

1987: He becomes chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and leads the fight against Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork, whom he said was opposed to Roe v. Wade.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Submit a Correction
Related Posts