You got us Axios; this is some serious clickbait and we just had to read the story to find out more.
Clarence Thomas suggests COVID vaccines are made with "aborted children" https://t.co/hHHG33qtQb
— Axios (@axios) June 30, 2022
As someone suggested in the replies, either Justice Clarence Thomas has changed his pronouns to “they/them” or he’s just reading something presented by the plaintiffs, as Axios reports:
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suggested Thursday in a dissenting opinion that coronavirus vaccines were developed using “aborted children.”
…
“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Thomas wrote in his dissent, referring to the plaintiffs that brought the lawsuit.
Referring to the plaintiffs that brought the lawsuit. So there’s nothing here to suggest that’s Thomas’ belief.
No he did not. https://t.co/Q6cDWbiJ6j
— JimmEEE (@EEElverhoy) June 30, 2022
No, he really didn’t. He was directly citing the argument of one of the parties, not making his own claim. The fact that no one in the media seems able to do basic reporting on SCOTUS decisions is a real problem and exhausting to watch. https://t.co/2Bws5fY7uD
— AG (@AGHamilton29) June 30, 2022
It’s exhausting
— DJ Manjo (@dj_manjo) June 30, 2022
I believe it's due more to intent than ineptitude but at some point that question ceases to matter.
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 30, 2022
I'd go as far as to say there is no doubt left anymore.
— Brutalleschi (@killer_surreal) June 30, 2022
Reading is fundamental.
— Christine McMonegal (@mc_mon1) June 30, 2022
Recommended
This is what happens when people give up trying to make compelling arguments and settle for just trying to make the other "side" look bad.
— Brian (@Bjmartin210) June 30, 2022
The question is would they be able to report it properly if the rulings went in their direction?
— Auston White (@AustonWhite3) June 30, 2022
And the best part is
"Thomas says they're derived from fetal cell lines" Then the fact check is "FALSE! – Some were developed using fetal cell lines."— Charles Burnette (@ReaganRebellion) June 30, 2022
Axios’ own “Reality Check” explains:
Some vaccines have used fetal cell lines during the early stages of the vaccine development, but the final products do not contain fetal cells. Additionally, these fetal cells came from elective abortions “performed decades ago.”
Oh.
I seem to recall them saying they used fetal stem cells in the development of the vaccine. And by they i mean journalists a near the end of 2020.
— Matrim 2.0 (@DavidNathanaelx) June 30, 2022
Each of the manufactures of the Covid vaccines currently available developed and confirmed their vaccines using fetal cell lines. But don't take my word for it. https://t.co/U1L7JL6coq
— old_jester (@old_jester1968) June 30, 2022
Every single thing is a lie.
— Ben Bradagh🇺🇲🇮🇪 (@BenBradagh1) June 30, 2022
They aren't even that hard to read, especially Thomas'. It's not written in Latin. It's shocking how little intelligence they have on SCOTUS issues
— Charles Burnette (@ReaganRebellion) June 30, 2022
You should know by now they intentionally distort the news.
They know we know and don't care.
— politicaljunkie (@politicaljunkd1) June 30, 2022
They know it isn’t true. They are just mad at him and hate him because they are racist, so the media is willing to lie about him.
— Greg Thomas—Pre-Trump (@gregthomaswv) June 30, 2022
They’re not dumb. They’re intentionally doing it. We need to stop acting like they’re just dumb and understand everything they get wrong is done on purpose.
— Political Chess (@JosePedroson) June 30, 2022
That tweet didn’t write itself.
* * *
Update:
Apparently, NBC News is running with the same story:
Quite a weird article by @abedelman @ariabendix. Claims at top that Justice Thomas said covid vaccines "are made with *cells from* 'aborted children.'" But he said they were "developed using *cell lines derived* from aborted children." Not same–and authors agree with latter! 1/ pic.twitter.com/l7muEGBRqe
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) June 30, 2022
Perhaps authors are claiming that Thomas's phrasing somehow means that the cell lines used now must have been immediately, rather than ultimately, derived from aborted children. But that's a bad-faith reading of what he wrote. 2/
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) June 30, 2022
Broader point (which I should have worked into first tweet) is that Thomas was summarizing argument of petitioners.
But, hey, any excuse for taking a whack at Thomas, as it will get lots of play from yahoos. 3/
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) June 30, 2022
The authors are so excited about their perceived "Gotcha" that all details escape them.
— Pigbirdjetfan (@PigbirdJetFan) June 30, 2022
* * *
Update:
Politico got the memo too:
https://twitter.com/politico/status/1542569323390189568
Thomas dissenting opinion on the left. “They object”…
And on the right is from the petition of cert he is citing.
He is literally quoting the argument of the petitioners, not making one himself or even agreeing with it. pic.twitter.com/Dq1Of4tHth
— AG (@AGHamilton29) June 30, 2022
Politico and NBC News also spread this false claim. One left-wing activist at Slate spreads a falsehood about a SCOTUS decision and it somehow ends up a story in 3 major publications… how does no one in the press see an issue with this? pic.twitter.com/wdjXkbvIXj
— AG (@AGHamilton29) June 30, 2022
Related:
As The View melts down over Dobbs, Whoopi Goldberg warns Clarence Thomas that he may soon go ‘back to being a quarter of a person’ https://t.co/mSt2AkZOow
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) June 27, 2022
Join the conversation as a VIP Member