CNN's Chris Cuomo seemed perplexed that evangelicals support President Trump, arguing that they only support him because "he's right on abortion."


While many big name celebrities regularly champion abortion, one reality TV star is calling pregnancy the “most beautiful, empowering, and life changing experience I’ve had in my entire life.”


On Friday, TheFederalist.com's John Daniel Davidson described the deeply politicized Steele dossier-related actions of the Obama administration and its still-present apparatchiks. Concerning a separate politics-driven attack, Davidson noted that "Obama’s Justice Department failed" at the Supreme Court in 2016 to compel the Little Sisters of the Poor to fund abortifacient drugs. That's true, but attempts to force the Sisters into compliance have not ended.


The liberal media are all for tolerance – but all bets are off when op-ed columnists question adherence to abortion. On Thursday, The New York Times published op-ed columnist David Brook’s “Abortion Memo.” In his “imaginary” memo on “late-term abortions,” a Democratic consultant advised Democratic leaders to end the party’s obsession over abortion.


Time is everything, especially when it comes to understanding the media’s priorities. At the end of January, there were two marches the same weekend both claiming to stand for women. But the network coverage was anything but similar.


At the Politico on Wednesday, Dan Diamond and Jennifer Haberkorn tried to portray a plan by the federal governments HHS to increase health workers' conscience protections as something vaguely sinister. In the process, they completely misstated the history of what they called "so-called conscience protections," and dishonestly whined that HHS's plan to enforce existing law is "a significant shift for the (HHS's Civil Rights) office."


For a second year, the networks are favoring a march supporting abortion and other lefty causes over a march for life. During their Saturday news shows the first evening of the Women’s March, ABC, CBS and NBC spent a total of 6 minutes, 43 seconds highlighting the event. In comparison, following Friday’s March for Life, the three broadcast networks spent just 2 minutes, 6 seconds on the pro-life rally.

 

New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters covered the annual pro-life march in Washington, D.C. under this petulant headline in the print version: “President Reaches Out To Foes Of Abortion.” (Otherwise known as the annual March for Life.) The paper has traditionally ignored the annual march entirely, while devoting copious space to much smaller left-wing protests like those supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants.


2 minutes, 6 seconds. That’s how much time the networks spent on more than 100,000 marchers this Friday. That’s how much time the networks gave an event where President Trump spoke. That’s how much time the networks gave a rally remembering 60 million unborn who perished through abortion.


Friday's New Day displayed a rare example of a CNN anchor hitting liberal guests on the issue of conservative women not being welcome at so-called "women's marches" that actually advocate exclusively liberal public figures and positions on issues. At one point, host Alisyn Camerota even commented: "You're only pro-women you agree with."


Forty-five years ago, on January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court handed down the infamous Roe v. Wade decision that made abortion on demand the law of the land. Sixty million abortions later, we are still battling over the disastrous ruling, in court and in the culture wars.


For the first time in history, the president is addressing the March for Life live via satellite. But does that mean that the media, who report on his every tweet, will finally give the pro-life marchers – and the millions of unborn they stand for – the coverage they deserve?